Handicapping the 6th Generation iPod

An anonymous reader writes "It's that time of the year again, when Apple rumors bloom with the fall foliage and the press is inundated with hype and wishful thinking. MP3 Newswire has a reasonably sober article addressing 17 of those rumors, even giving odds on the validity of each. From the article: 'It is the peripheral manufacturers that now have a heavy sway on what features the iPod will add to its 6th generation. The peripheral market has done more to cement Apple's proprietary technology as a standard than Apple itself, adding to the iPod's dominance. Mr. Jobs will not upset that balance without good reason and Apple's recent deal with Creative to make iPod peripherals shows he wants to feed it further. But the iPod needs something new to keep it fresh and ahead of the competition.'"

Comments

it needs a phone

[macadamia_harold]

But the iPod needs something new to keep it fresh and ahead of the competition.

Yeah, it needs an integrated phone, but Apple already sabotaged that idea with the lackluster ROKR joint-venture with motorola.

Re:it needs a phone

[NexFlamma]

Correction: Apple sabotaged Motorola's ability to be the one profitting from that phone.

Eventually you'll see your iPhone, but that time will not be until Apple is the only force behind it.

Re:it needs a phone

[heffeque]

Motorola has always made extremely unstable phones. It's no surprise that that one was buggy too.

Re:it needs a phone

[Robaato]

For what it's worth, in Japan the major mobile phone companies (DoCoMo, Vodafone/Softbank, AU) have promoted music-player phones since January or so. My current phone (DoCoMo N702iD) even plays AAC. The latest DoCoMo line of phones uses the fact that they all have music player software as their main selling point in advertising.

However, the ads specifically mention their WMA compatibility, so maybe Apple might be missing the boat in this market.

(and, of course, one of the phones is ATRAC compatible. Care to guess which manufacturer makes that one?)

Re:it needs a phone

[Midnight Thunder]

Correction: Apple sabotaged Motorola's ability to be the one profitting from that phone.

True, but I wouldn't put it past Motorola for screwing up themselves. I say this based on my own experience with Bluetooth and infra-red transfer, where you had to go and install extra software on Windows XP and even then it has issues. Then again it could be Windows issue.

For me Motorola is often almost there, but misses out on the detail.

Re:it needs a phone

[feldsteins]

Apple already sabotaged that

Apple did? Multiple choice:

The first thing a person would want to do with such an iTunes-phone is download something from iTunes and use it as a ringtone. But you cannot do this with the ROKR. This is because:

a) Apple hates it when you buy songs off iTunes.

b) Motorola would rather you paid them $2.99 for the ringtones they already provide.

c) The technology to make this happen is just too hard and/or expensive.

Re:it needs a phone

[MrAnnoyanceToYou]

After buying a Razr, I don't think I'd buy another Motorola phone. It's got a lot of hype, but not as durable as my old Nokia was by a long shot. It keeps overheating while I blow glass, going black after I leave it on for a few days, needing rebooting, and I can't load my own ringtones to it. All in all, I have to give it a bit of a thumbs down.

Re:it needs a phone

[soft_guy]

Motorola has always made extremely unstable phones. It's no surprise that that one was buggy too.

No one knows whether the ROKR is buggy or not because when people heard "holds 100 songs", no one bought one to find out whether it was buggy.

Re:it needs a phone

[soft_guy]

It keeps overheating while I blow glass

Maybe the temperature is too high in your glass blowing studio to operate electronics?

Re:it needs a phone

[dookiesan]

I bought a Motorola SLVR and it's great. Even with just 100 songs, I no longer carry my iPod video. It is _extemely_ slow to sync--especially when transcoding higher bitrate songs (it won't play VBR or > 160kbps)--and iTunes practically locks up while it is syncing. The latter is more a problem with iTunes than the phone I think.

One warning to anyone thinking of buying a SLVR though: headset, charger, and USB hookup all go through the same mini din connector. It appears that these are prone to wearing out. Mine is becoming loose and caused my headset to stop working; no more music until I bought a new one! If the phone-side connection goes out then you're screwed and after just two months, it appears inevitable that I will need to buy a new phone within the year.

I would avoid any phone that uses the mini din for everything. The music functionality itself is good enough for me, and the camera is excellent compared to my last phone as well.

Re:it needs a phone

[iluvcapra]

Does this particular ATRACS-playing phone happen to come with a rootkit pre-installed? I would think that would save their customers some time.

Re:it needs a phone

[Jahz]

Yeah, it needs an integrated phone, but Apple already sabotaged that idea with the lackluster ROKR joint-venture with motorola.

You think it is that simple? Did you follow the whole Apple-ROKR debacle? It's true that Apple burned one of its bridges on that, but there are still many other options (internal devel, nokia, sony, etc). The fundamental flaw that really killed the ROKR before it was even developed: Cellular Carriers.

The cell carriers are the gatekeepers to the phone bussiness. Without their adoption of your phone, it won't be offered "officially" with their services. You can develop the best, most awesome, feature-rich cellular phone ever imagined and still not make money on it without this type of support. Think about the Razor. AMAZING hit for motorola. Why?? Sure, many people really liked the phone... But for USD $300 or more? NO WAY!! It was the fact that carriers bundled the phone with plans for a mere $99 or even free that make the Razor a hit. The carriers even advertised it FOR motorola on TV, in newspapers, etc. Remember?

So now you say, 'okay that make sense, but why wouldnt the carriers LOVE to offer an iPod phone?' If you have not figured it out yet, go ahead and take a moment to think...

Answer: The iPod is part of a three-way orgy that does not work on its own. iPod + iTunes + iTunes Music Store. See it yet? How much do the cell carriers make on their proprietary ring-tone/music sales? My carrier sells songs for $3 USD/each. My buddy's sells them for $2.99-4.99 EACH SONG! iTMS sells songs for $0.99 USD, of which there is no room to cut the Carriers in. Officially supporting an iPod-iTunes-iTMS phone would result in a carrier potentially losing MILLIONS of dollars in global music sales.

Finally, I am comfortable buying any GSM phone, unlocking it by hand, and changing the sim card. Done it two or three times already. However, most people will not pay big bucks for a phone that requires such a procedure.

Re:it needs a phone

[Anonymous Coward]

The 2nd Gen Razr's have the itunes software loaded aswell. The problem with them is that there is a file limit on how many mp3s you can put based on how much space you have. (DUH? Not exactly...) If you have a 256 meg trans card it's 25 songs, 512 or 1 gig and it doubles to 50 tracks. Even if they are just 20 second clips of a skit on an album it counts as a track.

I suggest if you're looking for a phone + mp3 player check out *cringe* Sony Ericson. I have a w810i and haven't had any problems yet. It's great for getting chicks, though they seem to walk off w/ the phone and leave me :(

Re:it needs a phone

[Golias]

After buying a Razr, I don't think I'd buy another Motorola phone. It's got a lot of hype, but not as durable as my old Nokia was by a long shot. It keeps overheating while I blow glass, going black after I leave it on for a few days, needing rebooting, and I can't load my own ringtones to it. All in all, I have to give it a bit of a thumbs down.

Let's break this down, shall we?

It keeps overheating while I blow glass

You work in a glass-blowing studio, and you are surprised that electronics overheat when you leave them near the furnace???

going black after I leave it on for a few days

You are surprised that a battery-operated device shuts off after a few days of continuous use???

I can't load my own ringtones to it

Maybe you can't, but that's not the phone's fault. I made my own ringtones using iTunes, and had no problem using my Mac's bluetooth connection to load my custom ringtones, wallpaper, etc., into my RAZR.

The RAZR simply kicks ass over every phone I've ever owned, and is also way smaller.

Re:it needs a phone

[Hes Nikke]

Sure, many people really liked the phone... But for USD $300 or more? NO WAY!! It was the fact that carriers bundled the phone with plans for a mere $99 or even free that make the Razor a hit.

you're forgetting 2 facts:
1 - the iPod regularly sells in the same $300 (and up) price bracket. can you imagine the what apple would do to the phone market would if they replaced the Hard Drive iPod line with hard drive iPod phones in the same price bracket? wow.
2 - metroPCS. i have a metroPCS razr. $250 out of my pocket, no contracts. in hindsight it was a crappy deal, but it made a statement. i will NOT stand for being forced into a contract.

Re:it needs a phone

[MrAnnoyanceToYou]

Blah. You've purposefully misread much of what I've written. Not really interested in answering most of it, but uh... You're Wrong. It's nowhere near the phone my last one was, and that has nothing to do with how I'm treating it.

Ringtones and uploading are disabled by default with Verizon's phones. I don't want to flash a new bios into my phone, so I'm apparently SOL. Work for Motorola?

Re:it needs a phone

[aichpvee]

I don't think it's a called a rootkit when it's integrated with the operating environment.

Re:it needs a phone

[PlasticArmyMan]

As long as their landmines are more stable than their phones they should be ok.

Re:it needs a phone

[macadamia_harold]

what's to correct? that point was the entire purpose of the post! Of course Apple doesn't want a joint venture on the "itunes-phone" idea, which is why they sabotaged the idea.

you should be writing "I agree", not a "correction".

Re:it needs a phone

[Jahz]

you're forgetting 2 facts:

No I'm not...

1 - the iPod regularly sells in the same $300 (and up) price bracket. can you imagine the what apple would do to the phone market would if they replaced the Hard Drive iPod line with hard drive iPod phones in the same price bracket? wow.

Yes I can. It will be a huge waste for Apple. Like I said, the whole "phone" aspect is still not understood by most people. Apple sells MILLIONS of iPods every year, and mostly to people with little to no real technical ability. Much of the success of the iPod is due to its simplicity (click "import" to copy your cd then just plug in the ipod). 95% of iPod users will be lost when you tell them to pull the sim card from their phone and plug it into their ipod. So to make this work, you need support from at least one major carrier (at first). You need to be able to active the phone service at the Apple store, or the cell store.

Would the device be CDMA or GSM? 3G support? Bluetooth too I hope, right? It'd be cool if it ran cool Java games too! Hopefully a speakerphone function too.

Look, I would embrace an iPod phone with open arms. However, I doubt that even Apple can cram a full featured cell phone into the iPod form factor. Would it have good battery life? Somehow I doubt that the iPod-phone will do "phone" better than my cell... (hope i'm wrong)

2 - metroPCS. i have a metroPCS razr. $250 out of my pocket, no contracts. in hindsight it was a crappy deal, but it made a statement. i will NOT stand for being forced into a contract.

I paid $295 out-of-pocket for my phone for the same reason. Just changed providers too. Again, hardly anybody does this. Techno-Geeks are a very small (sometimes lucrative) niche of users.

Re:it needs a phone

[dclatfel]

I think we're going to see the widescreen iPod ... you know, the one that has the virtual click wheel overlayed on the touch sensitive LCD screen. This makes sense with the showtime theme -- in fact, to go a little further out on the limb, I'm going to predict that it will be introduced along with a device for streaming videos to TV sets. Not quite a Media Center PC, but more like Airport Express Video.

Add your predictions?

Re:it needs a phone

[Golias]

Ringtones and uploading are disabled by default with Verizon's phones. I don't want to flash a new bios into my phone, so I'm apparently SOL. Work for Motorola?

No, but I got my RAZR from T-Mobile. I guess they don't cripple their phones the way it sounds like you are saying Verizon does.

Still... It's not exactly Motorola's fault that you chose a shitty phone provider, is it?

Re:it needs a phone

[MrAnnoyanceToYou]

It hadn't even occurred to me that a cell phone provider would gimp their phones. The flat-out unreliability I have run into - in the glass shop, before I started working in the glass shop, out of the glass shop, whatever - is what I'm not happy with. The ringtone junk is just icing on the cake. Battery life is comparatively short, yes, but the problems I have are mostly related to me having to screw around with the phone once every day or two to get away from the blackscreening. And rebooting it because I can't get it to dial. And and and. I haven't mistreated this phone at all; in fact I've been pretty kind to it overall. The glassblowing is an example, and it's not like I put the stupid thing in the flames and say, "Heh heh. Ring now, bish." No, I take pretty good care of the phone and it has rewarded me with calls that don't ring for some odd reason, short battery life, two day late messages, and other general unreliabilities. I don't particularly want to RMA it, because then I get a refurbed one back. It's a cool LOOKING phone, but I wouldn't buy a second one at this point.... Of course, I've only owned it for six months, so it might get better. Who knows.

I'm sorry if I seemed a bit personal earlier. This phone annoys me, and life in general is mildly annoying at the moment. Some genius at a bank to go unnamed decided long ago that releasing software at 4:00 AM on Saturdays was a good idea and I've gotten roped into testing it.

Re:it needs a phone

[squiggleslash]

I have to say I agree with the person you're responding to. You are asking too much, and blaming the faults of others on the phone itself and its designers.

Verizon do have a history of crippling the phones they sell so they can extract more in OTA charges. The fact is though that the RAZR, as designed, is a fairly stylish, reliable, phone. The vast majority of users are very happy with it. Motorola isn't selling the same phones it was pushing out faster than it could design them three years ago.

I passed over it myself after deciding the V635 met my needs slightly better. The V635's a very solid phone, has crashed maybe three times since I got it. Battery life is good, not "the best" out there, but more than acceptable. Like most of Motorola's stuff, the V635 contains a significant amount of good, new, technology, well implemented - for example, the Transflash card, the high quality megapixel camera, the cleanly implemented Bluetooth. But I've met plenty of people with RAZRs who couldn't be happier.

The real problem in your case is you went with Verizon. Verizon, in my experience, has never put quality first, and it's simply not possible to buy a phone from them and know in advance what you're getting. IS-95 ("CDMA") advocates will tell you that many US carriers picked it for its supposed capacity and reliability. In my view, Verizon picked it because it's sufficiently controllable that they can exercise unparalleled control over their customers in a way they wouldn't be able to with an international standard like GSM. I didn't need T-Mobile's permission to put my V635 online.

In the mean time, unquestionably, you're running a phone that's been modified by a third party (Verizon), and you're complaining about its poor reliability as a result. I'm not saying don't complain to Motorola - DO complain, DO let them know that them letting Verizon do this is undermining your confidence in their products, but DO complain to Verizon too, and make sure you give the blame where it's deserved, not just to one manufacturer, in an industry where every cellphone manufacturer has to whore their designs to stand a chance of getting their products on the shelves.

Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[QuantumFTL]

I think Apple's priorities here are fairly close to the average consumers (especially those who support copyright even if they dislike restrictive DRM). I trust Steve Jobs' business intuition enough that I don't believe the next generation iPod will be crippled, etc. Who knows what features apple has coming? It could be a new look, a new feel, maybe lighter and brighter? To be honest, I don't know what else I want out of an MP3 player, except easier booting of linux on the damn thing, for whatever reason I'd want that..

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[QuantumFTL]

Alright, I'm sorry but this is just too funny. I didn't RTFA (trying to be an early poster) and I responded to the article as if "handicapping" meant "crippling" rather than "giving odds." I probably shouldn't be posting so late :)

In the spirit of the old bash.org quote: I am Justin Wick of Pennsylvania, and I am an idiot.

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[JulesLt]

It would be a change in practice if Apple were going to start thinking about third parties.
Historically they have never had a problem with incorporating software and hardware features into the Mac that have wiped out third party markets, and they've never been the best partner for retail stores (even before they had their own / own online store).

My favourite rumour (the one I hope is true) is the one about Dashboard widgets for iPods, of which there was some hint buried somewhere.
Given that Nokia phones are using a WebKit based browser, it is not too fanciful to imagine a WebKit port to the iPod, and Widgets would provide a nice sandbox for third party applications on the iPod. With a wifi connection that would be even more useful than just 'sync' based. I'm sure power issues could be addressed there (i.e. don't keep WIfi powered on, until it's actually used). Web access via BT-enabled mobile phones seems a more 'mobile' solution. I can't see a fully fledged web browser yet, given the limitations of browsing on the PSP - but I'd love to have my basic set of widgets on a mobile device.

I can just see Jobs casually pulling out his 6G iPod and showing it tracking some ebay auctions, then the Weather widget, sports results, etc - that level of functionality seems to have the right 'fit' for mobile browsing, but the typical Dashboard widget looks far better than any WAP page or Java App I've seen on a mobile.

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[timeOday]

To be honest, I don't know what else I want out of an MP3 player, except easier booting of linux on the damn thing, for whatever reason I'd want that..

I think that's Apple's problem right there. MP3 playing, in itself, is practically a free add-on for any device with a bit of storage space and a display. Much simpler than designing a good cell phone, I'd argue. I recently noticed an ad for a GPS device. After describing all the GPS functions, they casually mentioned that it is also an mp3 player. I can't see why every cellphone made in the near future would not have a good mp3 player in it. 1 GB flash retails for $25 now, and the power required to power headphones isn't much.

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[Bing Tsher E]

Well, 'free' in certain senses. But I don't want a music player burning down the battery in my phone. And I don't want a phone burning down the battery in my music player. And there is very little 'synergistic' circuitry shared by the two devices. Mostly, each function just takes away from the other, power-wise.

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[ceoyoyo]

No no no! Hands off my iPod.

You're describing a handheld computer -- a little Newton or Palm Pilot or something. I'd love to see one from Apple, but I wouldn't like to see the iPod turned into one.

Apple has been very good about resisting feature creep in the iPod.

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[timeOday]

No synergy? Everything an mp3 player needs, a cellphone already has, except a large flash memory - which is cheap and takes no power when not in use. Plus it makes perfect sense for a phone call to pause music playback (or go straight to voicemail, if you don't want your tunes interrupted).

Last night I had my son's birthday at a "fun center." Inside there were some kids playing video games. But outside, all the preteens were sitting on the curb for what must have been an hour and a half, sitting in a group but looking at and pushing buttons on their cell phones. I have no clue what they were doing for all that time, but they were really into it. And all I hear on slashdot is how phones are too complicated and "people" don't want to have multifunction phones?

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[tepples]

I can't see why every cellphone made in the near future would not have a good mp3 player in it.

Because the network operators want to make sure that you buy airtime to transfer the songs, not just copy them to the CF or SD cards using a file manager.

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[JulesLt]

Indeed - that is something a lot of techies don't seem to get - 'My iRiver can do X,Y and Z', why doesn't the iPod have Bluetooth, etc, when it is obviously something only a marginal group of people are interested in.
See also Blackberry : I've seen executives with Blackberries who are also carrying mobile phones that can do email AND laptops that could use that mobile phone to retrieve email - historically, the trend seems to be from complex multi-function devices to simple single function ones.

However, I still like the idea of Widgets on the iPod (I am thinking more of static visual widgets like the Weather widget, rather than anything interactive, which is where I see the difference from a traditional PDA or a Smart Phone - I don't see Apple putting a keyboard into the iPod). If the screen gets any larger, it might even be viable to sync up RSS feeds as well as Podcasts (already achievable via hacks, but it's not exactly the best devices for reading text on). I'm thinking of 'iPod as commuter device'.

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[Anonymous Coward]

So basically, it is going to turn into the "is everything except the kitchen sink" PDA-ish device that people here flame the competition over?

Funny how when Apple does something that the competition has been doing for ages it becomes a desired/toted feature that is the "best implementation ever" only because of the fact Apple did it.

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[pboulang]

You know what though? They HATE having multiple devices. Everytime they try and get a device that does more than one thing, one of the features just doesn't quite work the way it should. But they keep wishing and hoping for that all in one.

Blackberry had the early lead with email cause it just worked. Simple to setup, and used technology that allowed for long battery life yet constant communication. Windows mobile email is ridiculously difficult to setup for what it is, and burns battery life waaay more than the blackberrys did.

The blueberry, adding in phone to blackberry wasn't so good. Battery life suffered, and you had this huge honking device.

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[AmberBlackCat]

I think that's Apple's problem right there. MP3 playing, in itself, is practically a free add-on for any device with a bit of storage space and a display. Much simpler than designing a good cell phone, I'd argue. I recently noticed an ad for a GPS device. After describing all the GPS functions, they casually mentioned that it is also an mp3 player. I can't see why every cellphone made in the near future would not have a good mp3 player in it. 1 GB flash retails for $25 now, and the power required to power headphones isn't much.

I'd be happy if they could just make the phones hold a signal. If I'm going to have to spend a few hundred dollars, I'd probably go with an iPod with phone capability before a phone with iPod capability, just because my iPod has a history of doing what I bought it for.

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[ceoyoyo]

Agreed. Features are cool but... when the novelty wears off and it comes time to actually daily use you often find yourself wishing a few of the features (and a little weight and volume) would just go away.

Widget as UI element could be nice. I'm not sure exactly what kind of widgets you'd use since all of the ones I use on my Mac require the Internet. I'm sure someone would think of something semi-useful that would only require Internet access at the beginning of the day at most, though.

I don't think something that required connectivity all the time would be useful -- to start with, where do you find a constant supply of open access points? I used to think Bluetooth in a phone was a cool idea. Then I got one. Bluetooth headsets are nice, and I like Salling Clicker, but I don't leave it on all the time because it sucks batteries. It's just as easy to plug in a USB cable most of the time as it is to turn on the Bluetooth for synching appointments and things. Much faster transfer for doing songs too.

If they get a full face video iPod out with a decently high res screen it might well be nice for reading text off. I used to read books on my Clie... it would be nice to have that in the iPod.

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad Apple has also been very good about resisting bug fixes in the iPod. Guess they don't want my money.

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[ceoyoyo]

Neither one of those looks like a bug in the iPod. Both describe gaps when one MP3 ends and the next starts, which I believe is a well known flaw in the MP3 format.

There have been some bugs in the iPod, but Apple releases frequent updates.

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[Van Halen]

The AC is right.

First of all, the iPod adds a much larger gap than can be attributed to MP3/AAC frames alone. This is shown quite nicely in the AC's first link. This is poor programming and/or design by Apple, plain and simple.

Second, why should I care about an inherent limitation in the format? As a listener, I want the music to sound just the same as when I play it on a 20-year-old CD player. The iPod is far more powerful than a CD player, so why is its playback so much poorer?

Finally, there are many possible ways to eliminate the last-frame gap problem:

• Import gapless albums as single files, like the Join CD Tracks feature, but use chapter markers to indicate individual tracks within that file. Have iPod/iTunes treat individual tracks (really just sections of the larger file) the same as they do for separate-file tracks now. This means individual tracks can be part of playlists independently of the rest of the album contained within the same file, and metadata is still kept on a per-track basis.
• Detect silence at the end of the last frame of data and eliminate it. Very easily done.
• When importing as individual files, store as metadata the exact sample number of the last real audio sample, and honor that during playback. The is probably the easiest solution.

Given how simple this problem is, it's ridiculous that Apple has ignored it for going on 5 years now. Steve Jobs isn't the perfectionist that urban legends say he is, because this is precisely the sort of thing that should drive him nuts. Apparently it doesn't, and he's just happy with a crappy player as long as 99.99% of buyers never listen to gapless albums.

It wouldn't bug me at all if the rest of the experience weren't so far above the competition. Bah. Thanks for getting me going on that rant again... ;)

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[ceoyoyo]

I'm not denying that it's a flaw, and a flaw that bothers some (though not most) users. It's not a bug, however. It would be a feature if there were no gaps so it's not a bug that there are.

Although I really don't see why people who hate the gaps don't quit whining and go buy a gapless mp3 player. Is it because there's something about the iPod that makes it special enough to put up with the gaps?

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not a bug, however. It would be a feature if there were no gaps so it's not a bug that there are.

Sure it is. My CD player plays albums without gaps. The iPod and iTunes exist to replicate that experience with the added convenience of not having to constantly swap out CDs. It's a bug.

Although I really don't see why people who hate the gaps don't quit whining and go buy a gapless mp3 player. Is it because there's something about the iPod that makes it special enough to put up with the gaps?

Yes, that's exactly it. The seamless integration between the library and the device is top notch. No clunky filesystem interface, automatic sync both ways, tracking of metadata like Last Played Time and Play Count per song, smart playlists, etc. I've looked high and low, and found nothing that comes close. Plenty of other devices or alternative firmwares add gapless, but they are so severely lacking in the rest of this.

But, there's good news! Today Apple claims to have fixed this bug. The new iTunes and iPod pages both claim to have gapless playback.

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

Gapless Playback

Live albums, classical works, or any work that sounds best when it's continuous, now seamlessly transitions from one song to another.

http://www.apple.com/ipod/ipod.html:

And if you're a fan of live albums, classical works, or anything that sounds best when it's continuous, iPod supports gapless playback that seamlessly transitions from one song to another.

I'm going to have to check this out very soon. If it's a true fix and not a crappy subpar workaround, I'll finally buy a new iPod to replace the one that was stolen a year ago. I've been searching for alternatives and holding out for that year, so hopefully my wait is now over!

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[Van Halen]

Whoops, forgot to uncheck "Post Anonymously". Doh!

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[ceoyoyo]

You know, I can take an audio tape and toss it in the glove compartment and not worry about that. You have to worry about scratching CDs, put them in cases... considering they're supposed to replicate my experience with tapes (with a few improvements in sound quality and seek speed) they really aren't doing a very good job. Madonna should fix that bug.

Re:Apple is (mostly) on our side here

[Bing Tsher E]

Well, if you want to think that way, everything a chain-saw needs, a motor scooter has. Don't look for motor scooters with a chain-saw bar out front anytime soon...

Only one thing

[NexFlamma]

There is only one thing that could actively cripple the iPod, and that is DRM.

Apple's machine has an insurmountable mindshare lead on the competition. They have reached the point where their product name is synonymous with it's purpose. Tell 50 people that you're going to the store to buy a DAP and they'll have no idea what you're talking about, but if you tell them you're going to buy an iPod, they'll smile and tell you all about how they think iPod's are the bee's knees.

However, if Apple falls into the trap of DRMing the iPod/iTunes interface to the point where it becomes too difficult for the average person to use quickly and efficiently (read: anything that takes more than 30 seconds will lose the average person's attention span), just to appease the music conglomerates, people will very quickly lose interest.

Luckily for Apple, they're smart enough to know this, and the powers that be in the recording industry are quickly realizing that they need Apple more than Apple needs them.

Re:Only one thing

[cptgrudge]

anything that takes more than 30 seconds will lose the average person's attention span

October 12th, 2006.

Steve Jobs was arrested last Monday on suspicion of flooding the black market with Ritalin in anticipation of the forthcoming holiday season. Details at 11.

Re:Only one thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell 50 people that you're going to the store to buy a DAP and they'll have no idea what you're talking about, but if you tell them you're going to buy an iPod, they'll smile and tell you all about how they think iPod's are the bee's knees.

You're right that nobody except the manufacturers cals them DAPs. In Europe the more common term is MP3 player, and in Asia (at least in HK and China) they just call them MP3s.

Re:Only one thing

[10Ghz]

Tell 50 people that you're going to the store to buy a DAP and they'll have no idea what you're talking about, but if you tell them you're going to buy an iPod, they'll smile and tell you all about how they think iPod's are the bee's knees.

Maybe that's because no-one uses the word "DAP"? But if you mention that "I'm going to buy an mp3-player", most people will know what you are talking about.

Re:Only one thing

[Bing Tsher E]

There is only one thing that could actively cripple the iPod, and that is DRM.

Say that often enough and a few people might start beliving the iPod isn't already encumbered with DRM.

Sure, Apple was slick the way they went about it. But please, don't spread false rumors.

Re:Only one thing

[ceoyoyo]

Most people will know what you're talking about if you tell them you're going to to store to buy facial tissue too, but they still call it Kleenex in daily conversation.

Re:Only one thing

[hesiod]

It's a pointless observation, but most people I know call them tissues, not Kleenex. They call our copy-making devices "copiers," not Xeroxes... and they are Xeroxes. Although they do still call gelatin food products Jell-O.

Re:Only one thing

[ceoyoyo]

I have noticed geographic variations. Here it's copiers but definitely Kleenex. You eat Jell-O (I don't think there's even a convenient (one word) non-product name FOR Jell-O. I'm sure there are others that are so embedded that we don't even realize most of the time.

iPod isn't quite Jell-O, but it's getting up there.

Re:Only one thing

[Mattintosh]

The iPod is not "encumbered by DRM". The m4p format is. There's no DRM on mp3, m4a, aiff, wav, or any of the other several formats the iPod plays. If you don't want DRM, it's as simple as not buying music from the iTunes Music Store.

Re:Only one thing

[SenorCitizen]

I don't think there's even a convenient (one word) non-product name FOR Jell-O.

Umm... jelly?

Re:Only one thing

[ceoyoyo]

I didn't know about that definition of jelly. Here jelly is very similar to jam. Nobody would ever call flavoured gelatin jelly and wouldn't know what you were talking about if you did.

Well

[eclectro]

It could play ogg. Let's start with that.

Then have it boot linux next year.

Re:Well

[NexFlamma]

As much as I'm going to be burned alive for saying this, the reality is that no one outside of the Slashdot/IT/geek-cred camp cares (or even knows) about OGG support. You could do a poll of 100 people anywhere on the planet and maybe 1 or 2 of them would know what OGG is, and of those 1 or 2, I'd be amazed if they would request it on a DAP.

People know what an MP3 is, and talking about OGG and AAC and Apple Lossless just confuses them. Confusion leads to aversion. Aversion leads to fewer sales for Apple. Hence, you're going to have to get by without your OGG supporting iPod.

Re:Well

[tooth]

I'd love it as a "silent" feature, and have itunes be able to encode and play ogg as well.. they don't have to advertise or promote it, just have it there for people who want it.

Re:Well

[NexFlamma]

IANAAE (I Am Not An Apple Engineer), but I imagine that adding such a feature would inherently add some amount of extra work to their schedule (and thusly to the cost of the unit itself). Why would Apple want to add a feature that is only important to an extremely small minority, that may add quite a bit to the overall cost of either the R&D or the unit itself?

Re:Well

[Yahweh Doesn't Exist]

>they don't have to advertise or promote it, just have it there for people who want it.

that's not Apple's way when it comes to design and features: if it's not worth making a big deal of it, why is it worth including?

seriously, why would anyone want to use OGG? (I may be wrong but isn't it significantly more CPU intensive than AAC and lesser or comparable quality?)

the only reason is basically FOSS geeks with philosophical reasons and, as per their fundamentalism, they should have the courage of their convictions and not be using an iPod in the first place.

Re:Well

[ozmanjusri]

People know what an MP3 is, and talking about OGG and AAC and Apple Lossless just confuses them.

Maybe not everyone knows what OGG is, but just about everyone has heard MP3s that have been re-encoded too many times, and most people DO understand the difference between lossless and lossy formats.

I don't buy from iTunes or any other online sites because I'd rather have the higher quality original and compress it myself onto my portable music players. If Apple, or anyone else for that matter, offered me the option of downloading lossless originals and included an option to compress them onto my portable player, I'd join the downloading generation.

Until then though, I see lossy formats as just another sneaky way recording companies are trying to make me repeatedly purchase the same product.

Re:Well

[cerberusss]

[The next generation iPod] could play ogg. Let's start with that.

To show your support for the format, don't buy an iPod but instead look out for the Samsung YP-U1. Lots of nice features, costing a third of the iPod nano.

Re:Well

[MooUK]

Most people don't know what an MP3 is either. I know plenty of people who thin a WMA is an MP3, and so forth.

They may know the name, but they don't know what it is.

Re:Well

[Anonymous Coward]

Riiiight - So Apple CAN spend the time to do "Apple Lossless" (which the market place was begging for at the time - NOT) but CAN'T take a chunk of free code without encumbrances (key point) and implement it? Logitec Mice have always been supported in all their glory (well most of it) yet no where (except for the astroturfers on /.) does Apple "rave" about it - "I imagine" it's a silent feature! The real difference is Apple's ability to control the market and technology. Last time we saw a dominant company actively ignore free software in favour of proprietary (DRM) formats was - wait for it.... Microsoft, yet there was not an army of FUD drones insisting it was all in our best interests.... But because it's Apple - it's all good? wake up to yourself.... please.

Re:Well

[TheRaven64]

the only reason is basically FOSS geeks with philosophical reasons and, as per their fundamentalism, they should have the courage of their convictions and not be using an iPod in the first place.

There's nothing wrong with their using an iPod, but they shouldn't be using the poprietary OS. There are at least two Free alternatives, and using one of them would give them the features they want (including the 'feature' of not being able to play DRM'd music).

Re:Well

[QuantumG]

Sounds like the perfect reason for making the architecture open so people can add what they need themselves.

Re:Well

[Matthias Wiesmann]

Maybe not everyone knows what OGG is, but just about everyone has heard MP3s that have been re-encoded too many times, and most people DO understand the difference between lossless and lossy formats.

Err, No.
Most people might know their music is represented by files, and know that compressed files are smaller. I doubt the majority of people realise that MP3 or JPEG are a lossy compression schemes, or that the degradation increases when the file are decoded and re-encoded multiple times. People don't want to know about those things, they want to listen to the music.

Re:Well

[D. Book]

you're going to have to get by without your OGG supporting iPod

No, you don't have to:

http://www.rockbox.org/

Supports: iPod 4th gen (grayscale and color), 5th gen (Video), Nano and Mini 1st/2nd gen

Re:Well

[mark]

Oh yeah, yeah, I went to the website and I am *so* excited about the YP-U1, it's better than an iPod and just as easy to say. I mean just the catchy name is gonna sell it to me but then I read the marketing.

"Light and attractive, capable and compact, load it up and let it ride your side in style for revolution of senses...now that's flash!"

Brilliant! I... I feel like I was there!

With competition like this it's surprising Apple's still in business!

Re:Well

[klang]

And yet, every time speculation on the next generation iPod starts, people ask for:

- ogg (Face it, it's the BetaMax of this decade. Cross encode to mp3 and get over it.)
- replacable battery (plastic latch => worse design. Battery packs are available for those who need it)
- FM radio (can be bought as an extention => extra sales to Apple + lower unit cost)
- WiFi (which can not replace a wired connection => extra cost for Apple)
- BlueTooth (headsets are not universally accepted yet => unknown by Joe Sixpack => no benefits for Apple)
- CF, SD card bay (ext. for camera available. oh, to transfer music? get real.)

A new one:
- IM integration (I am listening to music in my world => do not disturb)

Re:Well

[eclectro]

Thanks, that's a great recommend. What's also nice is that it requires no software and shows up as a flash drive.

Re:Well

[klang]

Good point!

If you know (and care strongly) for ogg, chances are, that you will bother to install RockBox.

I just want something that works, the original firmware does. It seems like a good project which adds lots of features to a DAP, but .. is it really worth the efford on my part to install it?

Re:Well

[cerberusss]

I mean just the catchy name is gonna sell it to me but then I read the marketing.

Yeah, the name is really, really bizarre. Why the flying rhino they couldn't come up with at least SOME sort of a name is completely and utterly beyond me. However, with the product itself nothing really seems wrong.

Re:Well

[daserver]

Use http://www.rockbox.org/. It plays ogg and flac already on nano's among others. Why wait for Apple?

Re:Well

[Anonymous Coward]

Which would be mainly because no mainstream portable music players support the format.

To your average consumer they find files and they download them from wherever. If a garage band offers their stuff in OGG (however unlikely) and the consumer tries to put it on their iPod - it is a no-go, however if iPod supported it it would work an customers would be happy.

Sure the average person knows MP3 and little else, but those same people typically have file extension's hidden and determine a file's type based on icon. To them MP3 means music on a computer, not a file with a '.mp3' ext. All the iTunes software would need to do is to make the OGG icon appear like an MP3 icon and to the average user it would be transparent, while us more tech-orintated types are happy too as we don't need to transcode anything to play it on an iPod.

Re:Well

[cortana]

No one knows what an MP3 is. Half of the users think it's the actual player device, and the other half don't even know what a file is since iTunes has abstracted them away from actually managing anything so crass as actual files on an actual disk.

Yes, this is the same 50% of users who, after you finish reinstalling Windows, stare in blank uncomprehension when their email/music and copy of Word are missing, and you don't even bother to try explaining because why would they understand when the other 500 users this month didn't.

Re:Well

[NexFlamma]

Correction: Those are things that we ask for.

You're falling into the trap of assuming that we are the average consumer group, when in reality, the average iPod consumer is the 14 year old kid whose parents bought him or her and iPod for a birthday present to keep the kid from bitching about how all of his friends have one, but they don't.

Do you think that a kid who believes 50 Cent to be the voice of his generation is going to have any idea about open formats and removable memory/battery benefits?

Just because a group happens to be VERY vocal about their desires, they are not necessarily the majority, or even the most desired demographic.

Re:Well

[kfg]

I imagine that adding such a feature would inherently add some amount of extra work to their schedule . . .

One engineer on his coffee break. It's just a codec. A free, freely downloadable and fully documented codec.

KFG

Re:Well

[Anonymous Coward]

Asia seems to have pretty high Vorbis adoption.

Re:Well

[JonathanBoyd]

Apple wanted to use ALE for transmitting music over wireless to Airport Express, so there was reason to create it anyway. And for ALE is a greater improvement over WAV than OGG Vorbis would be over MP3 or AAC.

Re:Well

[KillerBob]

You may also want to check out a SanDisk Sansa e130. Doesn't support Ogg/Vorbis, which is a pity, but easy enough to get around by using LAME to encode your music instead. It *does* support MP3, WAV, and WMA playback, including MS's PlaysForSure DRM crap. So why is it better?

I get 8-12 hours of playback, depending on sound level, from a single AAA battery. Meaning the battery is interchangeable, and I can use rechargeables. Great for long road trips where I can't plug the device in... just bring a couple of extra batteries. Also, it's got a built-in FM radio. Finally, it has a built-in SD cardreader. So even though the device is 512MB, it's easily upgradeable just by carrying around extra SD cards. And it shows up as a USB drive when I plug it into the computer (as does the SD cardreader... meaning it works in Linux).

Re:Well

[ichigo 2.0]

IMO there's no point in supporting ogg. FLAC on the other hand would be a great addition, but I guess Apple lossless is good enough. It's not like HDDs are getting any smaller (on iPods or computers) so the amount of people using lossy codecs will only decrease.

Re:Well

[kwark]

First ogg is a container, when most people say ogg they actually wanted to say Vorbis (an .ogg could contain other codecs like flac).

And while I like the idea that Voribis is completely free, to my ears vorbis is definetly better quality over aac (faac) at the same bitrate. YMMV

But why argue, encode in whatever you like and your player supports, for portable players quality isn't that important anyway IMHO, the only time I use them is in crowded, noisy environments with their crappy default earbuds.

Re:Well

[Anonymous Coward]

why explain an acronym you only use once?

Re:Well

[chris_eineke]

Old bits don't die, they just keep rotting. :-)

Re:Well

[cerberusss]

I get 8-12 hours of playback, depending on sound level, from a single AAA battery. Meaning the battery is interchangeable

Yeah, this is a big advantage which the Samsungs and the iPods don't have. If the built-in battery deteriorates, it's not really user-serviceable and you either have to a) pay Apple SIXTY bucks or b) buy a new device...

Re:Well

[Dr. Spork]

Why would Apple want to add a feature that is only important to an extremely small minority, that may add quite a bit to the overall cost of either the R&D or the unit itself?

Because it might possibly take two engineers two afternoons to get ogg vorbis support working, it would get its own story on Slashdot and generate lots of other very cheap advertising, and it might tip me over the edge to thinking that the iPod is worth the extra money that Apple wants.

Re:Well

[Midnight Thunder]

It could play ogg. Let's start with that.

Then have it boot linux next year.

Given that there is iPod Linux, then there is no need to wait. As for Ogg I am not sure that it is supported by iPod Linux, but then again with a little work is doable and there is no need to wait for an Aplle business case to add it.

Re:Well

[klang]

True, true.

I am trying to see the next generation iPod from Apple's point of view; trying to figure out what to expect in the future. In that equation I do disregard the desires of "us" and I even give a reason WHY theese features woun't happen.

I would like to see a survey clarifying your point of view regarding the average consumer group, I don't think you are right.

Re:Well

[Midnight Thunder]

A little extra research reveals Rockbox. If I understand, from scanning the site, Ogg support is in there.

Re:Well

[wakingrufus]

I deal with it by buying a cowon iaudio mp3 player. it's better in all ways to the ipod. including OGG support :-). im hoping for this whole little empire based on the ipod and its accesories collapses. with such a dominant marketshare and mindshare, they haven't really innovated in a long time. they just steal a few good ideas from other companies from time to time.

Re:Well

[Hawthorne01]

Confusion leads to aversion. Aversion leads to fewer sales for Apple.

Fewer sales for Apple leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.

Re:Well

[usrusr]

the availability of the rockbox port makes me really considering buying an ipod, even if only because it happens to be by far the cheapest offering in music centered (i don't even watch tv, why would i need a mobile video player?) players with >20 gb hdds

guess i should wait a while though for the port to get more polished (maybe i could get a cheaper 5th gen when the new ones come out? but iirc apple was always very good at not having many leftover predecessors in stores when the new gen comes out)

Re:Well

[Bing Tsher E]

IANAAE (I Am Not An Apple Engineer), but

You're an Apple astroturfer, and it's seriously starting to show in your comments, dood.

(how do you survive on the free cheese-n-crackers they give out at the Apple Store, btw?)

Re:Well

[usrusr]

for me the core bonus of ogg support would lie in avoiding having to encode a given piece of music more than once. this can be very interesting for people who often create audio content themselves for uploading somewhere on the web and want to avoid close quarters warfare with the thomson lawyer squad.

admittedly, this issue used to be more pressing when cpus were slower at encoding audio - but at the same time the "voirbis heavy on cpu" argument is also shrinking in the face of mpeg4 video capable mobile players.

Re:Well

[Bing Tsher E]

Obviously, the original firmware doesn't, at least for some people.

It might be worth the effort to install it sometime in the future. As Apple slowly introduces new DRM 'features' it's nice to know people are working on parallel unencumbered firmware. Kinda makes your investment in 'closed' hardware less risky.

More than being 'worth installing' it is worth supporting, even if you're not using it at the moment.

Re:Well

[c_forq]

I think the key point is the tiny amount of people that care about odd first said of the iPod "No wireless. Less Space then a Nomad. Lame." Of the tiny amount that care about ogg, there is an even smaller amount that would actually think about buying an iPod.

Re:Well

[usrusr]

i don't trust the cowon M3 because of it's reliance on a cable remote. as much as i love cable remotes i know how much those cables suffer from wear and tear.

the X5/M5 has this mini joystick, if it is as unusable as the one on my w800i then i would want to avoid that too.

in all other aspects of course, the cowons blow the ipod away. if only they were not considerably more expensive than an ipod with the same capacity, at least where i live :(

Re:Well

[Bing Tsher E]

The 'requires no software' is a feature of almost any other MP3 player but the iPod.

Translation: iTunes is an integral part of the DRM on the iPod. Why any reasonable person would be fooled by this is just strange. Then again, I installed the software on the CD that came with my cheapo 'Creative' MP3 player- a few weeks after I'd started using it, though, as it is essentially a 'thumb drive with a play button and earphone jack.'

Re:Well

[rthille]

Now, you know that's not true. Hell, unless the engineer managed to sneek it into the iPod (Graphing Calculator style), there'd be Product Management meetings, code reviews, QA, etc...

God knows I hate all the overhead of product development and I've snuck some enhancements into releases that PM never saw, but they still got QA'd and rolling a software update to the ~50 customers would have been a lot easier than the millions of iPod users.

Re:Well

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would Apple want to add a feature that is only important to an extremely small minority, that may add quite a bit to the overall cost of either the R&D or the unit itself?

The same reason any company adds features for a small segment of the market, because it undercuts the ability of competitors to use that small motivated and loyal customer base who need or really want that feature to fund development of competing products.

iPod was not early to market with their first MP3 player and they know very well that they can't simply ride their market dominance forever. Many dominant companies have stagnated when management gets this attitude. Electronics companies either innovate or stagnate. Sure they could just hire another bean counting CEO and sit back and enjoy their market share as it slowly dwindles down over and simply blame the customers for not wanting their old products, but luckily Apple hasn't yet gotten this attitude.

And the other reason Apple might listen, is because they have so much market share already, that they have very little room to grow, if ogg support would get them even a small fraction of market share and be inexpensive to implement, then why not?

Re:Well

[Squalish]

Some people lack a proper sense of scale... We're talking about a geek audio codec. Much of the planet is still waiting for telephone service. You could do a poll of 10,000 people randomly distributed throughout the planet and probably still only have 1 or 2 who recognise OGG.

Re:Well

[Yvan256]

It could play ogg. Let's start with that.

If you absolutely need Ogg support, get a Samsung MP3 player (not all their players support Ogg, but a search for "Ogg" gave 71 results).

Then have it boot linux next year.

It's been done years ago.

Re:Well

[Yvan256]

IMO there's no point in supporting ogg. FLAC on the other hand would be a great addition, but I guess Apple lossless is good enough.

Wait a minute. Both FLAC and Apple Lossless are lossless CODECs. The end result (the decoded output) is exactly the same. Why is Apple Lossless "good enough" compared to FLAC? They give you exactly the same result... I guess you only wanted to do some free Apple bashing here.

It's not like HDDs are getting any smaller (on iPods or computers) so the amount of people using lossy codecs will only decrease.

No it won't. There's two reasons for that. Music capacity and battery life.

That's like asking someone if they want to pay 100$ for a 1GB player that can hold 11 CDs and play for 10 hours or pay 350$ for a 10GB player that can hold 11 CDs and play for one hour. That's your lossy vs lossless comparison right there. Only audiophiles will pay more for less.

Remember: it took WMA@64kbps before people began to ask "why does my music sound like crap?"

Re:Well

[Westacular]

Both FLAC and Apple Lossless are lossless CODECs. The end result (the decoded output) is exactly the same. Why is Apple Lossless "good enough" compared to FLAC? They give you exactly the same result... I guess you only wanted to do some free Apple bashing here.

There's much, much more to an audio format than just the accuracy of its output. Off the top of my head, there's also:

-Computational complexity of encoding and decoding
-Compression ratio
-Licensing/openness concerns
-Software/hardware support for the format
-Error tolerance
-Other additional features (metadata, streaming, support for better than 16-bit 44kHz audio, etc.)

FLAC is better than Apple Lossless in most of these categories, but (in the grandparent poster's opinion) the difference is small enough that "Apple lossless is good enough."

Re:Well

[Yvan256]

There's much, much more to an audio format than just the accuracy of its output [...]

Except we're talking about lossless CODECs here:
- The computational difference between the two is, in 2006, probably nothing as far as the processor is concerned.
- Compression ratio: lossless CODECs usually averages around 50% depending on the music you're encoding.
- Licensing/openness: unless you're a Linux user with strong ethics about that kind of thing, it's not important. Joe Street wouldn't even know what you're talking about.
- Error tolerance: zero in both cases since we're talking about lossless audio (unless you meant lost encoded data, in which case I have no idea which one's better)
- Additional features: I know that Apple Lossless has metadata and streaming (that's how Airport Express works). As for 24-bit and 48KHz support, I don't have such a file to do any testing with iTunes. But I do know that AAC allows 48KHz and that my iPod does play 48KHz files.

The whole debate of FLAC vs Apple Lossless is a bit pointless. It would be valid for debating between MP3 vs WMA vs AAC vs Vorbis, but in the case of lossless audio, there's no difference in the end result (audio). If there's any difference, then one of the CODEC screwed up.

Re:Well

[toddestan]

Go back 10 years, and ask 100 people what a MP3 file is. You might get 1-2 geeks that knew what it was, so it was clear back in 1996 that nothing would ever became of MP3, which is exactly how it is today. Oh wait....

Besides, go ask a 100 people right now if they knew what a AAC file is. I would guess that you would only get a handful, even amonst iPod/iTMS users. Of those that knew it is a music file format, I would guess a good fraction would think it's a propriety Apple format.

I really don't understand the opposition to OGG. It's just a file format. The hardware is powerful enough to support it. It would not add any additional complication to the iPod, unlike something like a FM tuner. There are no licensing fees. If Apple supported OGG in the iPod, most users would not know or even need to know, because of the way that iTunes abstracts away things like formats in the file system. OGG files would just be another song. Sure most users wouldn't know or care, but it would be nice for the ones that do know and care.

Re:Well

[7Prime]

That's actually because most people don't know what a WMA is, not because they don't know what an MP3 is. The weird thing is that most people don't know what an AAC is, yet the most popular portable music player is, by default, an AAC player! AAC is the BEST DRM compatable format available... and no matter how much you screem, DRM is a neccessity to the music industry and is here to stay, so we should be pulling for it in favor of lesser, more brutal formats like the PlaysForSure WMA. I laugh when people call the iPod an mp3 player... as I don't have a single mp3 on mine. Similarly, iTMS doesn't sell a single mp3, and yet people consistantly call it an "mp3 downloading store". MP3 is dead, we should get used to it, and drop it from our lingo.

Re:Well

[7Prime]

Only problem is that OGG is a processor hog, and thus, a battery hog. Apple has taken enough flack for being a bit weak on the battery life end of things, so why would they want to risk n00bs accidentally ripping their CDs to OGG and then saying, "hey! my iPod only plays for 4 hours!" I think it's probably for the best that they keep OGG out. I do want gapless playback, though. For all of my concept albums, I've had to make duplicates that are one file, just so I can listen to them straight through without breaks. AAC can play gapless (hell, so can MP3s, with a read buffer), I just wish Apple would support it.

Re:Well

[ichigo 2.0]

Why is Apple Lossless "good enough" compared to FLAC?

The other poster already gave you a good answer, but I'll add one more reason: I, and many others, are lazy and would like to avoid converting between formats. Most of the music on P2P is in FLAC format (I base this on what I've seen, not on any real statistics), so it would also mean that most of the music in other people's collections is also FLAC. Hence the "good enough".

That's like asking someone if they want to pay 100$ for a 1GB player that can hold 11 CDs and play for 10 hours or pay 350$ for a 10GB player that can hold 11 CDs and play for one hour.

After a couple of more Moore's law doublings of capacity, we'll have enough space on our players to have our entire music collections in lossless format. When that happens, there will be no point in using lossy formats. It's still some years down the road, but the shift from mp3 to lossless has already started happening. If one rips a cd today, there is really no point in encoding it in a lossy format, audiophile or not.

Re:Well

[Yvan256]

After a couple of more Moore's law doublings of capacity, we'll have enough space on our players to have our entire music collections in lossless format. When that happens, there will be no point in using lossy formats. It's still some years down the road, but the shift from mp3 to lossless has already started happening. If one rips a cd today, there is really no point in encoding it in a lossy format, audiophile or not.

Aside from Moore's law not being about storage capacities, it still makes no sense to pay for more storage and less battery life for the sake of a slightly better audio quality, especially for portable audio players.

You may be right that someday it'll be true, but we're still far from there. I'd choose Apple Lossless only if I could get a flash (or other) iPod with 120GB for about 200$CAD. Until then, lossless is just wasted space. Just use a higher bitrate for those tunes that requires it.

As for most music being in FLAC on P2P networks, I have to strongly disagree. Either you're filtering keywords or searching for very obscure music. Most of the music on P2P is in MP3, by a huge margin.

Re:Well

[ichigo 2.0]

Aside from Moore's law not being about storage capacities, it still makes no sense to pay for more storage and less battery life for the sake of a slightly better audio quality, especially for portable audio players.

What do you think flash memory is made of? ;)

At some point the question goes from "Why pay more to use lossless when I can fit more lossy music on my DAP?" to "Why use lossy formats when I can use lossless and still have too much space for my needs?". The extra power usage is bad though, and more efficient designs would be nice.

You may be right that someday it'll be true, but we're still far from there. I'd choose Apple Lossless only if I could get a flash (or other) iPod with 120GB for about 200$CAD. Until then, lossless is just wasted space. Just use a higher bitrate for those tunes that requires it.

YMMW, of course. A 4 GB nano can hold ~10 hours of lossless music, and I'd be very hard pressed to even come up with that much music worth listening to, so lossless makes sense for me.

As for most music being in FLAC on P2P networks, I have to strongly disagree. Either you're filtering keywords or searching for very obscure music. Most of the music on P2P is in MP3, by a huge margin.

Sorry, I mistyped. I meant that FLAC is the most popular format of all the lossless music on P2P.

Re:Well

[Tiro]

MP3 will be open soon enough; the patent expires in a few years.

Re:Well

[NexFlamma]

But the difference is that there was a void where the MP3 could fit. There was nothing like it before it came out.

OGG and AAC and so on won't catch on because for 99% of people, their purpose is already served by MP3's. And as much as audiophiles want to be pretentious and argue the point, most people can't hear the difference between 192kbps MP3 and anything above that.

Re:Well

[MooUK]

MP3 has come to mean "any music on my computer" to the average person, in the same way that "hoover" means any vacuum cleaner, "selotape" means any such product, and "iPod" means any portable digital audio player.

Re:Well

[kfg]

OK, two engineers over four coffee breaks, plus 50 managers over 100 meetings.

Once upon a time Ford introduced a new car model. It was their first offering with a spring loaded hood ornament to prevent breakage. It was not until the car was introduced at a show in its final form that it was discovered that the ornament could be bent down far enough to cause a scratch in the paint. There was much consternation over this, as they figured it would take three years to fix the problem in production.

That's why I prefer to work as an independent who could fix it in half a coffee break.

KFG

Re:Well

[Scudsucker]

You might get 1-2 geeks that knew what it was, so it was clear back in 1996 that nothing would ever became of MP3, which is exactly how it is today. Oh wait....

Yes, wait and think about why the mp3 caught on in the first place, and it's advantages over WAV. Then think about the number of similar leaps Ogg makes over mp3. You know, none.

I really don't understand the opposition to OGG.

Because Oggers act like it's the second coming of Crist, when in reality nobody gives a damn.

Re:Well

[Scudsucker]

After a couple of more Moore's law doublings of capacity

But there is no Moore's law for battery life, and having to read 25 megabytes of data vs 4 megabytes of data per song is going to kill your battery.

Besides, why do you want lossless files for a player you'll be listening to with headphones?

Re:Well

[ichigo 2.0]

But there is no Moore's law for battery life, and having to read 25 megabytes of data vs 4 megabytes of data per song is going to kill your battery.

I agree, that is a problem with current battery tech.

Besides, why do you want lossless files for a player you'll be listening to with headphones?

Why not? I am unable to fill up a 2 GB DAP with lossy audio, as I don't have that much good music, so the space would go unused otherwise. Converting my existing mp3 files to lossless is pointless of course, but not having to convert my existing lossless to lossy saves time. This isn't true for all users of course, but everyone has a point when filling up your player with yet more music stops making sense, and quality becomes more important. While it seems like a waste to use lossless with headphones, I think it's a good idea to remove compression from the sound quality equation completely.

Re:Well

[SenorCitizen]

And yet, every time speculation on the next generation iPod starts, people ask for:

I don't need any of these. I just want gapless MP3 playback. I believe I'm not the only person in the world who likes to listen to classical, live, prog-rock, or mix albums.

Too bad Apple has dug in with a huge array of things non-gapless... like iPod, iTunes and all those copies of songs sold through the iTMS. If they went gapless now, they'd have to do it with an active gap remover thingy that might have unintended consequences. But really, LAME gapless (like foobar2k) would do it for me.

Re:Well

[7Prime]

I agree, completely. "MP3 player" was commonly used to refer to any digital music player. But more and more, the term "your iPod" is being used. NBC switched, in it's advertisements, a few months back from using the meme "Download our newscasts to your MP3 Player" to "Download our newscasts to your iPod", simply because their realizing that the term "iPod" as a universal is becoming more accepted. If I were Apple, I'd be paying them to say that, but they don't even have to, because society is pushing that last little bit for them.

Re:Well

[Scudsucker]

Probably the best solution then would be to add a downconvert option to library software, for those who like to keep their digital music in lossless format but want good battery life on their mp3 players. This would become more important if the industry ever quits dragging their feet on DVD-audio or come up with a new surround-sound format for computing devices.

Re:Well

[toddestan]

Because Oggers act like it's the second coming of Crist, when in reality nobody gives a damn.

I think it's more about "Not invented here" syndrome amonst Apple fanboys. You can hardly mention Ogg without someone writing a stupid ranting about how the iPod shouldn't support Ogg, simply because it shouldn't. If you don't care about Ogg, then ignore it.

Re:Well

[klang]

Oh, gapless playback would be nice. I don't care if it would only work on AAC files, I can live with that. If I had to re-encode my cd's to get gapless playback (and playcounts for each track) I would do it.

Madonna's entire back catalogue was added a year ago as well as her new album. That album really doesn't have any gaps. Hopefully, she is complaining to Steve about this! (plans within plans)

As for the rest of the music sold on iTMS .. I can't believe that Apple doesn't have high quality source files from which to downsample to whatever the current standard is. Converting from non-gapless mode to gapless capable mode would "just" be a question of computing time.

Re:Well

[Yvan256]

Probably the best solution then would be to add a downconvert option to library software, for those who like to keep their digital music in lossless format but want good battery life on their mp3 players.

Apple already has that feature in iTunes, although it's for storage reason instead of battery life. Unfortunately that feature is only enabled for the iPod shuffle...

Digg this story?!

[Anonymous Coward]

How dare he! C'mon boys, lets slashdot this server into a hole so deep he'll need a bulldozer to Digg it out!

They already have the last item

[Anonymous Coward]

"iPod Home Entertainment System = 125:1 - Like the in-dash iPod I think it is inevitable, with an Apple widscreen TV connected to an Apple Mac mini-based DVR with dock for whatever the future top-of-the-line iPods will offer. I just don't think it is on the near horizon."

You don't need a "ipod dock on a mini" to accomplish attaching a mini to any HDTV input, you just need to be able to get the content to it easily somehow. One friend of mine has had a mini attached to his HDTV for awhile now, and have most of his DVD's on the HD for play. The mini comes with a remote already, all that is missing is convenient movie sales via ITunes, or perhaps it shoud be renamed IMedia. And that seems to be a sure bet, given the "It's Showtime" announcement on Thursday.

IMHO we are on the cusp of a change in the way A/V is delivered to our tubes.... er.. i mean plasma/lcd/DLP/etc... :)

Re:They already have the last item

[Yetihehe]

or perhaps it shoud be renamed IMedia

Nope, already taken.

Ahem

[ThePengwin]

Has anyone realized that pretty much all of these rumors, if real, would be crap? Theres far better things you could put in a media device. For one why don't they have a different form factor and make a longer screen, that could change orientation like many handhelds to give better movie playback? Or even better a SCRATCH RESISTANT SURFACE?

It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[pain]

- You can't retrieve Songs from the iPod. (yes there are programms available)
- Content purchased at iTunes has DRM on it. (yes there are programms or
      you could burn a purchased track and then rip/mix/burn it to remove
      the DRM.

Clueless people are wondering about it, but hey it's an iPod.

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[NexFlamma]

- You can't retrieve Songs from the iPod. (yes there are programms available)

Sure, but the only real reason one would need to retrieve songs from an iPod would be after a re-format, and god knows that the average user simply does not reformat all that often. Hence this DRM is not really a worry for them.

- Content purchased at iTunes has DRM on it. (yes there are programms or you could burn a purchased track and then rip/mix/burn it to remove the DRM.

Agreed, but I would be willing to bet that the majority of iPod owners get their music from CD's that are ripped into iTunes. While the iTMS may be terribly successful as an online retailer, it's still got a ways to go before it catches up with physical album sales. This DRM, while inconvenient to the /. crowd, also doesn't do much to the average user either. Besides, the /. crowd is the ones who know of ways around these restrictions.

I've always had a theory that the DRM on iPod's is so easy to break by intention. Apple may be being forced to apply some DRM, but they don't have to put good DRM in place.

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[ewl1217]

Sure, but the only real reason one would need to retrieve songs from an iPod would be after a re-format, and god knows that the average user simply does not reformat all that often. Hence this DRM is not really a worry for them.

That's completely wrong. I might move between up to 5 computers during a week. Is there anything wrong with me wanting to take my music with me on my iPod?

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[bestinshow]

I might move between up to 5 computers during a week. Is there anything wrong with me wanting to take my music with me on my iPod?

Plug in iPod. Play songs stored on iPod via iTunes on the computer.

No, you can't permanently download the songs from the iPod to the computer - maybe use a DVD instead, and get a backup in the process? Even Apple's DRM allows you to have 5 (IIRC) authorised copies of a song you've downloaded from iTMS on various computers and players.

Next time you comment, make sure you know what you're talking about. Sheesh. Bet you'd be one of the first to cry FUD on a Microsoft says something bad about Linux story.

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[ewl1217]

Plug in iPod. Play songs stored on iPod via iTunes on the computer. No, you can't permanently download the songs from the iPod to the computer - maybe use a DVD instead, and get a backup in the process? Even Apple's DRM allows you to have 5 (IIRC) authorised copies of a song you've downloaded from iTMS on various computers and players. Next time you comment, make sure you know what you're talking about. Sheesh. Bet you'd be one of the first to cry FUD on a Microsoft says something bad about Linux story.

Well, you're already assuming that iTunes is on the computer. That aside, not all the computers I use have a DVD drive. I know I can use the iPod as an external hard drive, but I don't want two copies of every song I have stored on my iPod just to use my music like I should be able to in the first place. Not to mention my post has nothing to do with the iTMS (maybe that wasn't clear, but that's not what I as talking about).

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[thatguywhoiam]

Sure, but the only real reason one would need to retrieve songs from an iPod would be after a re-format, and god knows that the average user simply does not reformat all that often. Hence this DRM is not really a worry for them.

There is another legitimate reason: limited HD space.

Up until a year ago, my girlfriend had an old 500Mhz white iBook (20GB drive) and a 20GB iPod. So logically she figured she had 40 gigs to store music. But because of the iPod's one-way street (at least with iTunes) you really only have 20GB again, as the iPod simply mirrors what you have on your HD. You can't use it as 'additional' storage unless you put the songs on the data partition, and then you can't access them on-the-go with the iPod.

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[eraserewind]

You are cutting Apple slack because of a historical system (CD sales) that they have nothing to do with. Apple's sales are DRMed. CD sales are not (well, more or less) Apple seeks to replace CD sales with iTunes sales. Apple seeks to replace DRM free sales with DRM sales. And it's precicely the slashdot crowd that is not inconvenienced by DRM. It's those who don't know any better.

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[ZachPruckowski]

Apple doesn't care about iTMS. Apple uses iTMS to sell iPods. Apple makes pennies per song on iTMS after bandwidth and royalties. Apple's iPod margin is much better. iTMS is a reason to buy an iPod instead of a Creative. It's a loss-leader that just happens to make money.

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[k_187]

then don't buy an ipod? why bitch about something not being what you want when you aren't forced to buy it?

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[mjpaci]

Just proof your gf is an idiot.

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[Shawn is an Asshole]

You can't retrieve Songs from the iPod. (yes there are programms available)

You don't need a program to copy songs off of an iPod. There's a folder on the iPod called "iPod_Control", which is set as hidden. There is a sub folder there called "Music". All of the songs on the iPod are stored there, though the names are like "gtkpod003240.mp3" in my case. If you use iTunes it's a couple of letters and then the extension. They're all tagged, so you could then drag it into (say) iTunes.

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[Anonymous Coward]

asshole.

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[Anonymous Coward]

"Plug in iPod. Play songs stored on iPod via iTunes on the computer"

BZZZT! You *cannot* play songs off of an ipod with iTunes. iTunes will only play music that is in your library on your HD, and moreover will attempt to automatically sync your local library to your ipod unless you have turned off that (default) action. This can be disasterous if your iTunes library on a second computer is empty, for example.

You are probably only assuming that iTunes will play songs off of an iPod directly, because that would be a basic and simple feature that makes perfect sense. Alas, it is not so.

iTunes makes it impossible to sync music between two different computers (say, a desktop and a laptop), and it is really goddamn annoying. On the other hand, Anapod explorer does let me play music directly from my iPod, so thank god for that.

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[IntergalacticWalrus]

You can't retrieve Songs from the iPod. (yes there are programms available)

Why do people keep spreading this bullshit? The songs are stored as plain files in /iPod_Control/Music/F?? (where ?? is some numeric value apparently used by some hashing algorithm). Yes, the filenames are lost, but basically any modern file manager (including XP's Explorer of course) displays the metadata so it's not really hard to guess which file is which song.

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[dangitman]

and moreover will attempt to automatically sync your local library to your ipod unless you have turned off that (default) action.

Bullshit. This is not the default action. The default action is to ask you if you want to re-sync the iPod to the new machine, and delete the files on it - or to leave them alone. It gives you this choice when you plug the iPod in.

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[Mattintosh]

It's quite simple to retrieve songs from the iPod without any additional software (other than iTunes and an OS). You basically open the iPod as a HD, drag the music files directory structure out of it. If you don't care how your songs are organized, you're done. If you do care about that, you need to open iTunes, open the preferences, click the "keep my music organized for me because I'm lazy" checkbox (or whatever it's called), then add that entire copied-from-the-iPod folder hierarchy to your iTunes library.

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[thatguywhoiam]

go fuck yourself, troll.

Re:It is already DRMed. Was:Only one thing

[dr00g911]

Actually, in iTunes 7, there's a nice little menu to copy your purchased files off of the iPod. There are also new menus to back up your library.

Most of the new features that weren't eye candy had to do with backup and safeguarding of your DRM'ed purchases, and IMO it's a welcome step.

What I'd like to see...

[Anonymous Coward]

1) Replaceable faceplates
This is a HUGE issue for me. I'd like the iPod to have snap-in faceplates in various colors, and some patterns like flowers and camoflauge. White is just so... boring.

2) 3D interface
I think, with the color screens, we need to get rid of the boring list interface and do some sort of 3D spatial interface. Imagine flying through your playlist!!!

3) Integrated camera, and bluetooth headset
Get rid of the accident prone earbuds, and go with one of those cool bluetooth headsets that the business guys wear for their phones. And a camera, so I can upload pictures to all of my friends!!

4) Wireless connectivity, and IM integration
I'm thinking like a slide-out keyboard, so I can chat with my friends whenever I'm near a Wifi spot. That would rock!

These are just some of the ideas I think would make the iPod a much better product. I mean, it's a good entry into the MP3 player market, to be sure. But if Apple wants to be taken seriously, they need to start including some basic features. I don't want to pay that much money and then just be able to play MP3's.

Re:What I'd like to see...

[/ASCII]

That's the funniest troll I've read all week!

Re:What I'd like to see...

[Anonymous Coward]

if Apple wants to be taken seriously, they need to start including some basic features

I think marketshare would indicate Apple is being taken seriously. Your post on the other hand, ain't doing as well.

Re:What I'd like to see...

[jimicus]

To you, "Irony" means "sort of like iron", doesn't it?

Re:What I'd like to see...

[GNious]

@3: Apple dont do Stereo Bluetooth (A2DP). Dont ask me why, but Apple, like Nokia, seems to positively hate that kinda new-fangled, usefull technology... /G

Re:What I'd like to see...

[cynicalmoose]

Bluetooth headsets are a no-no, given they only support 8kHz. Not good for decent audio.

Re:What I'd like to see...

[ceoyoyo]

Oh hey, I've got some stuff on my wish list too!

1) Bigger screen, better resolution. 15" MINIMUM and at least 1200xwhatever. Widescreen preferred.

2) Built in speakers

3) I like the keyboard idea. Let's have a track pad too

4) DVD burner

5) More USB and Firewire ports, gigabit ethernet and a digital video connector

6) How about a decent processor? Core maybe? Make it dual while you're at it.

7) Magsafe connector. ;)

Re:What I'd like to see...

[moggie_xev]

A2DP
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A2DP

The quality is good way above 8KHz. They are the best wireless headphones I have used ( my wired set are grado 60s )

Shakey

[Anonymous Coward]

TFA: "The Satellite radio companies are on financially shakey ground as of late."

C'mon, spell-check your damn article.

Well, the article suggests that

[SmallFurryCreature]

They are going with a metal screen. So no more scratches because the plate of metal keeps your lcd screen protected and safe from scratching. What do you mean you can't see through metal, geez you non-kryptonites always got something to whine about don't you.

Maybe they should use a glass display. What do you mean you don't fancy having a fragile piece of glass in your pocket.

Then again apple could have easily solved that. For that matter any maker of device with a screen. Supply a bundle of that stick on plastic so people can just put it on and tear it off when it gets too dirty. Works great but exactly why do I have to buy them from a 3rd party. Oh wait, yeah I should have know by the piece of rag, sorry, case you get with an iPod. A penny saved is a penny earned and apple earns a lot of pennies. Overcharging, underpaying and not giving a shit about the enviroment. Remind me again why they are considerd the good IT company?

Re:Well, the article suggests that

[xwizbt]

> Remind me again why they are considerd the good IT company?

That's Steve's reality distortion field. Duh! :)

Re:Well, the article suggests that

[ThePengwin]

Isnt it amazing how IT can make more money by saving money? Heres a great example:

If Microsoft dosent fix bugs in their OSes they save money, but then people need those bugs fixed, so Microsoft will make a new OS, and people have to buy it to fix thier problems, giving MS more money!

Every company does this in one way or form and its very very pittiful.

Re:Well, the article suggests that

[1u3hr]

Maybe they should use a glass display. What do you mean you don't fancy having a fragile piece of glass in your pocket.

There are extremely tough glasses, eg as used on quality watches.

Re:Well, the article suggests that

[ta ma de]

Sometimes the glass used in quality watches is made of sapphire - aka transparent aluminum.

Re:Well, the article suggests that

[fossa]

Just to clarify, transparent aluminum oxide or alumina, a ceramic, is often confused by the news as "transparent aluminum metal". Alumina is one of the hardest materials next to diamond. The polycrystalline mineral form of aluminum oxide is called corundum while both sapphire and ruby are transparent single crystal forms with various impurities giving color. Sapphire single crystals are grown commercially and sold as substrates for making gallium nitride LEDs, the blue ones, because a gallium nitride substrate is too costly. Presumably, watch makers also purchase this single crystal sapphire for use in watch faces.

Re:Well, the article suggests that

[eboot]

True, but not indistructable. When I was hit by a car my watch screen broke (swiss army watch, a proper one) Now of course that didnt matter as it was on my wrist and only a tiny piece of glass. What I would not like is for my ipod to shatter in my pocket, severely damaging the surrounding area.

Re:Well, the article suggests that

[1u3hr]

What I would not like is for my ipod to shatter in my pocket, severely damaging the surrounding area.

How would it "shatter"? I find it hard to think how it could cause much of an injury, more than if the screen was plastic. If he screen was facing in, unless it was pierced by something very sharp (which would do plenty of damage by itself), your flesh would cushion it and it and be unlikely to break. If facing out, the iPod should block any glass shards from going in.

Perhaps that's why they use soft plastic though, paranoia of product liability from some unlikely accident.

Re:Well, the article suggests that

[mpaque]

There are extremely tough glasses, eg as used on quality watches.

You might be thinking of sapphire, which is quite hard, and so scratch resistant. It is also brittle, and shatters more easily than glasses or hard plastics. It's also expensive. A piece large enough to cover the iPod Nano display will run about $85 each in lots of 1000, and at 1 mm thick that might be too fragile. I don't know of a vendor who can supply these by the million. They're relatively labor-intensive to make, being sliced from a synthetic sapphire using a diamond saw.

Rockbox firmware (on ipod) already plays ogg

[Anonymous Coward]

Rockbox is an alternative multiplatform firmware that plays ogg, flac and various codecs.
There is a beta port for the ipod.

Actually the faceplate idea is okay

[SmallFurryCreature]

The GBA had them, although not officially and you had to open the whole machine but it did solve the scratched screen problem easily and cheaply. Just buy a new one for a couple of bucks, fiddle a bit and you had clear vision again. Granted the GBA case itself was robust enough and who cares anyway if that gets marred because it ain't a fashion accesory that makes a statement about you! (at least I hope not since mine was pink)

If you could easily replace the transparant part of the iPod then all the scrathing problems would be gone. Why is it so difficult for the IT companies to learn the lessons from real life? Have you ever seen a helmet in wich the faceplate can't be easily exchanged? Transparent plastic scratches so you make it easy to swap out. Homer simpson would get this but not Steve Jobs. For me this simple design flaw explains all the problems that exist with IT.

Playlist management?

[Nithron]

Well, uh... They could let you remove songs from a playlist without needing to plug it into a PC. Maybe.

Re: "It could play ogg"

[Anonymous Coward]

Hahahahahahaha!!!!

Killer feature that would never happen (offically)

[James McGuigan]

Wi-Fi / bluetooth support with built in file sharing.

PC Dude: Hey man, what you listening to...
Mac Dude: An old favourite, Assemblage 23
PC Dude: You mind if I listen...
Mac Dude: Sharing ear-buds is so last millenium, but watch this...
Mac Dude:
PC Dude:
PC Dude:
PC Dude: Cool !!!
RIAA Dude: You guys can't do that, thats, like, stealing, man.
RIAA Dude: Anyway, hows you all do that, I thought we had managed to ban all that stuff since the 60's like drugs, free love, sharing.
RIAA Dude: Don't you know we are at war those damned commies, err, I mean terrorists
Mac Dude: If I'm the Mac, and your the PC and Tux is there doing the filming thus is always out of the picture, what does that make him.
Tux: He must be Sid, the Digital Restrictions Monster in disguise who trys to destroy all the cool toys.
RIAA Dude: Mock me if you wish, but we will see who laughs last when I sue you for $150,000... per song...
Tux: If you strike me down now I will become more powerful than you can ever imagine...
Tux: Hey wait, didn't the last guy to use that line get killed shortly after...
RMS: Look you signed up to this. GPLv3, Section 7 says "Give me libery or give me death"
RMS: I know we tend to focus more on the liberty bit than the death bit, but hey thats where the intrest is...
RMS: But it would really help if you could submit a patch, once you have finished getting that death thing completed, that is...
RIAA Dude: Hey, I'm the RIAA and I demand to have the last word.
Tux: OK

Re:Killer feature that would never happen (offical

[James McGuigan]

< Opps forgot I can't use without encoding them %gt;

Wi-Fi / bluetooth support with built in file sharing.

PC Dude: Hey man, what you listening to...
Mac Dude: An old favourite, Assemblage 23
PC Dude: You mind if I listen...
Mac Dude: Sharing ear-buds is so last millenium, but watch this...
Mac Dude: < clicks button >
PC Dude: < clicks button >
PC Dude: < looks down to see song plaing on his own iPod/buds >
PC Dude: Cool !!!
RIAA Dude: You guys can't do that, thats, like, stealing, man.
RIAA Dude: Anyway, hows you all do that, I thought we had managed to ban all that stuff since the 60's like drugs, free love, sharing.
RIAA Dude: Don't you know we are at war those damned commies, err, I mean terrorists
Mac Dude: If I'm the Mac, and your the PC and Tux is there doing the filming thus is always out of the picture, what does that make him.
Tux: He must be Sid, the Digital Restrictions Monster in disguise who trys to destroy all the cool toys.
RIAA Dude: Mock me if you wish, but we will see who laughs last when I sue you for $150,000... per song...
Tux: If you strike me down now I will become more powerful than you can ever imagine...
Tux: Hey wait, didn't the last guy to use that line get killed shortly after...
RMS: Look you signed up to this. GPLv3, Section 7 says "Give me libery or give me death"
RMS: I know we tend to focus more on the liberty bit than the death bit, but hey thats where the intrest is...
RMS: But it would really help if you could submit a patch, once you have finished getting that death thing completed, that is...
RIAA Dude: Hey, I'm the RIAA and I demand to have the last word.
Tux: OK

Typical Mac users

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple's customers are like no others--a rich blend of the most sociologically elite with those seeking elegant, simple computing... Unlike users of Intel/Windows computers, a significant portion of Apple's users are active , exploratory , avant-garde and early adopters . The activities they enjoy are unique in the way that they more often incorporate rich media such as video and music as well as more active prosumer behavior than many more passive Windows [and Linux] users.
                                          — MetaFacts, Inc.

With above-average household income and education levels, the Mac population [is] very attractive [ intellectually as well as physically .]
                                          — Nielsen/NetRatings (as quoted by C|NET)

Re:Typical Mac users

[Gentlewhisper]

Apple's customers are like no others--a rich blend of the most sociologically elite [atspace.com] with those seeking elegant [atspace.com], simple computing... Unlike users of Intel/Windows computers, a significant portion of Apple's users are active [atspace.com], exploratory [atspace.com], avant-garde [atspace.com] and early adopters [atspace.com]. The activities they enjoy are unique in the way that they more often incorporate rich media such as video [atspace.com] and music [atspace.com] as well as more active prosumer behavior than many more passive Windows [atspace.com] [and Linux [atspace.com]] users.
                                                                                    â" MetaFacts, Inc. [metafacts.com]

With above-average household income and education levels, the Mac population [atspace.com] [is] very attractive [ intellectually [atspace.com] as well as physically [atspace.com].]
                                                                                    â" Nielsen/NetRatings (as quoted by C|NET [com.com])

Enjoy your $1000 Zippo lighter troll. And as for being very attractive....

Re:Typical Mac users

[MamiyaOtaru]

Sarcasm (or at least recognizing sarcasm) is a lost art. I'm really sure the GP intended to portray Mac users in a positive light with the picture of a unique artistic type licking a foot. - sarcasm

iPhone

[Bender Unit 22]

It should be a phone. It makes sense to me, I always carry a phone around sometimes, I wish I had taken my ipod with me. But the phones/music players I have seen, have had a bad interface. The ipod is a simple device when it comes to navigating the interface. It should be possible to integrate into a phone.

Re:iPhone

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't always sometimes carry a phone around, that's a contradiction.

What the iPod really needs...

[Anonymous Coward]

What the iPod needs is something that just about every other generic mp3 player has... an FM radio! While it's amazing that we're expected to listen to our own songs every day on our iPods, occasionally it's nice to tune into something else....

Re:What the iPod really needs...

[Anonymous Coward]

Marconi's dead, man. Get over it. Nobody wants to listen to that crackly old shit any more.

Re:Killer feature that would never happen (offical

[Anonymous Coward]

tl;dr

Dopey Alert!

[PopeRatzo]

Nobody calls their mp3 player a "DAP". It's called an "mp3 player". I go to Best Buy and ask "where are the mp3 players" and the pimply kid points me to the right aisle.

And as far as "..DRMing the iPod/iTunes interface to the point where it becomes too difficult...", for me it's too difficult if there is any DRM at all on it. I'm not interested in DRM and I won't buy a player or music with DRM as long as I have an option. And with music-lovers on the internet and flash memory so cheap, I'll always have an option.

I just bought an 8gig SanDisk flash player that does video and plays mp3, wma, practically whatever I want. And it was cheap enough that I don't worry about it getting scratched by the change in my pocket. "Not Crippled in Any Way" is the kind of mp3 player I will buy.

I am so sick of big companies telling me how I'm supposed to enjoy music/play games/watch movies. This economy is consumer-driven and it might be time for consumers to take the wheel.

Re:Dopey Alert!

[mrchaotica]

If you won't buy a player with DRM, why did you buy the SanDisk? It does have DRM (namely, "PlaysForSure") on it, you know!

Re:Dopey Alert!

[tepples]

I go to Best Buy and ask "where are the mp3 players" and the pimply kid points me to the right aisle.

So should some people be asking "Where are the MP3 players that also play Vorbis?"

umm.. OGG????

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it only going to take SIX generations before apple finally plays OGG files???

Re:umm.. OGG????

[NosTROLLdamus]

I am in charge of ordering for a mid-sized company located on the west coast. Earlier this week the head of the productivity deparment approached me, and informed me that we would issuing portable sound-file players to employees that would have compressed versions of meetings and company lectures downloaded on them so employees who otherwise would miss out on these, or when scheduling them would cause conflicts. Some personal use would be allowed, as studies have shown this increases moral and therefore productivity.

Now, when I looked into portable audio playing technologies, I check into apple first, due to the buzz about them, and I thought their progressive image would mesh well with our company. I was let down when I discovered that not only would the Ipod not play "OGG" soundfiles (which our meetings are "encoded" in), that the only thing it could play were files that were downloaded from apple's internet music store.

I think this is a very foolhardy decision from apple. If apple wants to stay competitive in today's buisness driven market they need to be more willing to work progressively with corporate entities, much like companies like IBM, who we've worked with in the past, and have demonstrated admirable corporate synergy.

Here's What I Want

[LearnToSpell]

I think most people here would agree that often you need to own one of something to learn what kind of features are really important to you, and which don't matter so much. I've never had an iPod, but I got a Vaio portable in a moment of insanity, used it for three days, unloaded it on eBay (goddamn I hate iDiot cAsE), and bought a Zen Xtra, which has been very good to me.

Here's my list of killer features. Some are obvious, and some a lot of people won't agree with, but this is what I'm looking for:

• As small as possible. I didn't think this one mattered too much, but the Zen is slightly larger than what I'd like. The screen does not matter to me. I don't need colour. I don't need video playback. I don't need to have 2 1/2" pictures of my loved ones to tote around. Just the facts, ma'am: Artist, album, title. Time's ok too. (Which leads me to another question that /. may know: how small can a HD-based player get, if a company were only interested in that? What's out there that's TINY?)
• As large as possible. I have a 60G, and it's full. 3,500 CDs, lame --preset extreme... you do the math. (I would, but it's 9 in the morning. :-P) Anyway, that'll come with time.
• Replaceable battery. This is a huge must. There are plenty of places I go without power, and it's great to have 3 spares ($12 on eBay) that take about 10 seconds to swap into the Zen. That's the deal-breaker on an iPod for me. Of course, if you make the battery life 30 hours, that would work too. Sony got that one right, although that thing was huge.
• Decent software. Just stay out of the way, please. The Vaio software (required) was the most insanely annoying crap I've ever had to work with in my life. If it shows up as an external drive, and I can drag and drop, I'd dance a happy jig. To Finntroll. \m/ o_O \m/ KZenExplorer works fine in Linux, and I think the iPod stuff is ok (?). I must must must be able to pull stuff FROM the player TO my computer of choice. Fuck your DRM. I've spent tens of thousands of dollars on music. If I can't play it where I want, when I want, you get nothing.
• Gapless playback. If you ever play live stuff, you know about this one.
• Full tag support. Vaio was retarded here as well. I spend many hours getting my tags right - use them!
• USB charging. Not critical, but this is my dream player, so it's in there. :-)
• Line-out. Again, not critical, but it's great to have a wire hanging out of my stereo waiting for an instant collection to show up.

And I want tail fins... And bubble domes... And shag carpeting! And a horn here, here, and here. You can never find a horn when you're mad.

That's about it, I think. The only real complaint I have about the Zen is its physical size. *sigh* One day...

Re:Killer feature that would never happen (offical

[kamapuaa]

How old are you - 14?

iNewton

[ptomblin]

I bought a Treo so I wouldn't have to carry a phone AND a PDA AND an iPod everywhere I go - now I'm down to Treo + iPod. If Apple would make a combined iPod + PDA + phone, I would buy it in a minute. The Newton had features that the rest of the PDA community still can't hold a candle to - why don't they dust those designs off and have another look at them?

Hey, and if they could put a spot on the back for credit cards and money, I could leave my wallet at home too! :-)

Re:iNewton

[RossumsChild]

Hey, and if they could put a spot on the back for credit cards and money, I could leave my wallet at home too!

Which would be awesome, because then in a single mugging or pickpocketing event, your entire life could come to a screeching, horrific halt.

Have you ever considered that maybe your ID/cash and your electronic devices are best isolated for the same reason that you don't keep your matches and lighter fluid inside your fireproof safe with your birth certificate?

Re:iNewton

[ptomblin]

Which would be awesome, because then in a single mugging or pickpocketing event, your entire life could come to a screeching, horrific halt.

Yeah, because normally muggers are so picky. "No, not the ipod and cell phone, just your wallet. Thanks. And can you take out that other stuff from your backpack too?"

DRM IS GETTING worse on the ipod already!

[TheCouchPotatoFamine]

unless you haven't noticed, the songs that are in the hidden directory USED to be in non-ordered folders, true, but the song titles were right. This means that (and as a set and setting - i'm a sunday muscian and have a bunch of my own music on the ipod) if i lost a file i wanted i could still search for and retrieve it. As of the latest firmware update, NOW IT AIN'T like that. All songs have been renamed to a XXXX alphanumeric code such that, except for filesize, i can't figure out what is what at all. Some of MY music i'd really like back is trapped.

Just a cute litttle apple feature, or the closing alligator jaws of the ipod trap?

Well, if you boil a frog slow enough they'll nary jump an inch to save themselves. You decide.

Meh.

Re:DRM IS GETTING worse on the ipod already!

[fbartho]

dude that's different than DRM, the actual filename is not what matters to the IPOD, it reads the name of the track from the ID3 tags. Those folders and names of files are a hash of somekind for the track and a unique ID for the track. Look at the Itunes Library.xml file that stores the description of your library on your computer. Each track has a unique ID as well as each playlist and the playlists simply reference the unique ID's of the tracks they contain. Blame the industry that made it such that you couldn't officially remove the files from your IPOD, that made it a possibility for the programmers to optimize the internal workings of tracking specific songs on the Ipod. Instead of manually trying to find the song you somehow lost within the official library, just use one of the 3rd party Ipod explorers to do the looking. They will scan the files and list them by their real name instead of the alpha numeric.

Re:DRM IS GETTING worse on the ipod already!

[Mattintosh]

So what?

If you're trying to restore using the iPod as a backup, it's quite easy to copy the numeric file/folder structure, tell iTunes to keep your stuff organized for you, then add the copied folder structure to your iTunes library.

Oh, and if you look in the XML file in that hidden folder, you'll find that every song is in there, associated to its numerically-named file. I believe they're grouped by playlist, too.

I haven't read the article ...

[NoMaster]

... (after all, this is slashdot!), but I had this line of thought today :

Video iPods exist. Apple is doing its downloadable "DVD" video thing with Disney. What are the odds of a video iPod with SD 720 x 540/576 TV output turning up in the next generation or two?

I mean, it's the perfect match. Apple want content, and know that people want to use that content anywhere - but studios want content locked to a device. Well, if you can't have portable content, how 'bout a portable device?

An iPod-sized pocket portable "DVD player" equivalent would be the next "if it does 80% of what I want, it's good enough" killer device - much like the original iPod / FairPlay mix.

Re:I haven't read the article ...

[NoMaster]

(Oops, I meant 720x480/576 TV-out. Why does every other forum in the world have edit capabilities, but not /.?)

Dual headphones, wireless...

[Chordonblue]

I work at an all-girls secondary school in PA and I have to tell you that one of the things I see most common is two girls trying to share a single iPod. I think wireless is inevitable, or maybe even a dual jack model. Sure, I know you can get a jack splitter, but it's not the same.

Re:Dual headphones, wireless...

[rickb928]

Crap, my bluetooth phone headset at work will take 4 MORE sets for conferencing. Put bluetooth in it, use the Verizon profile (no file xfers) and let it pair up a second set, or third, or fourth... No splitters needed. Now imagine bluedriving to snoop on somebody's BluePod...

And no more battery drain than one set.

Brilliant!

rick

Re:Dual headphones, wireless...

[Abreu]

I work at an all-girls secondary school

Must... avoid.. making... comment...

Re:Dual headphones, wireless...

[Anonymous Coward]

I work at an all-girls secondary school in PA and I have to tell you that one of the things I see most common is two girls trying to share a single iPod.

Let's hope they continue to act that way when they grow up! /duck

iPod with drag and drop..

[Anonymous Coward]

Just about every other MP3 player on the market supports this. The iPod is retarded in that it does not support this feature, and the only way to use it is through iTunes. Of course, the fanbois will come up with some excuse for this, just as they would if Apple started murdering people.

Re:iPod with drag and drop..

[Anonymous Coward]

I've dragged and dropped songs before (in Windows and OSX). It's not completely obvious how to do it but I have done it before. How did you get modded "Interesting"?

Re:iPod with drag and drop..

[oberondarksoul]

Say I've just ripped a new CD I've bought and want to put it on my mp3 player. I need to plug the player in, open an Explorer/Finder/etc. window for the player, another for wherever my music is, find the new CD, drop it across, unmount the player, and remove it. Not impossible, not a huge hassle, but when you've a lot of music, this begins to get tiresome.

Conversely, with iTunes, I just plug it in.

Re:Well, You can make your ipod play ogg...

[Ogi_UnixNut]

and FLAC, and another seven or so codecs, if you use the RockBox firmware.

I got a 30GB Video ipod as a present (5gen), while I was looking for an irivier, because I wanted ogg vorbis support. But by the end of it, I came across the Rockbox firmware, which is an opensource replacement for the apple firmware, and provides a lot of extra features like:

Support for lots of codecs, including AAC,mp3,Ogg,ALAC,FLAC
Gapless playback
Replaygain support
Extensions in the form of plugins (including games)
Fully Theamable
Can copy songs both too it and from it, appears like a USB storage device

And others, but those are the ones I use. While Apple caters to the masses, who are not interested in things like vorbis support, for those of us that are, the option exists. As such I see little reason for apple to bother implementing it, as long as they do not try to prevent people doing it themselves.

Also Rockbox does not remove the apple firmware, so you can switch between the two, allowing you to use the Apple firmware (and iTunes) if you wish side by side with rockbox.

FM Transmitter would be nice

[nurb432]

While an FM reciever is cool, a built in transmitter would be even better.

And speaking of FM, why hasnt anyone made one with a AM receiver?

Re:FM Transmitter would be nice

[SenorCitizen]

In many countries, radio transmitters always have to be licensed, and licenses are typically not granted for commercial frequencies(ie. any frequency your radio will pick up). Likewise, in (most) parts of the world AM is long gone.

I've got an iTrip, and yes, it's illegal where I live.

Re:FM Transmitter would be nice

[nurb432]

It would be a simple manner of disabling the transmitter via code, using something like a DVD region code or something so you dont have to produce 2 models.

AM is still a huge business here in the states ( i would imagine the largest market for ipod other then Japan ), and if you go to the expense of adding an FM receiver, including AM isn't much of a cost increase.

And while i understand it might be illegal for you to have a itrip, i also tend to ignore stupid laws myself

On-The-Go-Lists

[vkapadia]

You can add/remove songs from On-The-Go playlists on the newer iPods, I believe.

All you need to do is hold down the center button on the song until it blinks to remove that song from the playlist.

Re:On-The-Go-Lists

[Nithron]

When I do that... It adds the song to another on-the-go playlist, lol

What it will be

[Lepton68]

The new device will be 4" by 6" by 0.75. The unit will be white plastic. All sides will be flat except all corners are rounded. There are no controls on the device except a hold switch. There will be an iPod dock port and a headphone jack and an infrared port. The entire front will be a touch sensitive 16:9 color screen. The front is touch sensitive. The device will have a rechargable battery and a hard disk. The battery is user replacable and the unit can be opened relatively easily by the user.

The device will work in multiple modes. As an iPod you hold it vertically. The entire screen shows the list of artists, menus and so forth. Touch anywhere on the screen and a translucent image of a click wheel appears. The location of the wheel varies a bit according to unit orientation and touch position. You use it as usual. Drag around the circle to scroll, tap or press to click in the five positions. The unit senses strength of touch by pressure on the case and/or variation in area of contact. Bluetooth allows loading stuff on the device albeit slowly, and using BT headphones.

The unit also works as a video player. The click wheel appears on top of the video as you touch. BT allows slow file transfers. Of course the port is high speed.

The unit also works as a learning remote control. A set of remote buttons appears on touch. It is an IR remote for CE devices, and a Bluetooth remote for your Mac. Your Mac shows a second screen on the screen of the device. Your touch controls the cursor and you can use guestures, and type if necessary on an onscreen keyboard. Fully control your Mac through this, ala Apple Remote Desktop. Audio output from Mac transmits to device so you can hear it. Using a bluetooth headset you can both hear the other Mac and transmit your voice to it, to control ot via Apple Speech recognition.

The unit also is a GSM quad band phone. You open the unit and put in your SIM card. Phone controls appear on the touch screen. Use BT headset and voice control.

This is all speculation. But it is perfectly logical and CAN BE DONE NOW. Well worth $500. I don't know if it comes out next week but you can bet the farm it will come out.

Re:What it will be

[Anonymous Coward]

The new device will be 4" by 6" by 0.75. The unit will be white plastic. All sides will be flat except all corners are rounded. There are no controls on the device except a hold switch. There will be an iPod dock port and a headphone jack and an infrared port. The entire front will be a touch sensitive 16:9 color screen. The front is touch sensitive.

This is all speculation. But it is perfectly logical and CAN BE DONE NOW. Well worth $500. I don't know if it comes out next week but you can bet the farm it will come out.

You might have some trouble finding a 4x6 16:9 screen.

(Bold for emphasis mine.)

Re:What it will be

[klang]

You might have some trouble finding a 4x6 16:9 screen.
let alone one that can be powered by a battery that fits inside "0.75" .. oh, it's user replacable, as if that's going to help :-)

Re:What it will be

[Anonymous Coward]

Well the form factor I'm talking about would be something like this: Take a Sony PSP, which is 0.75" thick and has a user replaceable battery. Chop off the two ends where the game controls are, and you end up with just the screen and something about the right size. Actually, that measures out to a 3" by 4" 16:9 sceen. Movies on the PSP don't look half bad, actually.

Why it will be

[Lepton68]

Why this speculation? Because the parts have all been there for a while. And Apple has issued nothing big for a long time, and this takes a LOT of work to pull together software-wise. Note we already have voice control input and output on our Macs. We already have tablet control. We already have Apple Remote Access. We already have Bluetooth. Note I didn't put in Wi-Fi - it sucks power and BT is going to be revved soon to have much faster transfer and much longer range and higher-sound fidelity.

And let's recall Apple bought a huge data center recently. Huge. Very high capacity. Sure this will be used to ship movies around but also to handle the MNVO phone service. Apple would never ever brook the bull current phone carriers throw. So they will contract with Cingular and make their own service. Note Disney already DID this. Now Apple will have full control of the carrier. They can allow transfer of data freely, unlike the current carriers, and they can allow easier and more tightly integrated sync between phone and computer. The Apple phone will work with any carrier and Apple phone service will work with any GSM phone but Apple phone service will have tons of features no other carrier will, when used with Apple phones. And its all sold in the many Apple retail stores.

No new iPods all year, what happened? This. Is. Big. Better iPod. Video iPod. iPhone. Remote Mac control. Consumer device remote control. Very tight integration. Video AirPort Express plus BT range extender. I'm tellin ya. Soon! It's hard to get all these ducks in a row. I have no indide info. Just a brain.

Re:Why it will be

[Anonymous Coward]

and the battery on this thing will last how long? 2 minutes?

It needs ogg

[bilbravo]

I need something that will play on both my Sansa e250, and my fiance's iPod. MP3 is nice, but ogg is just as good (if not better, depending on the crowd) and it can be much smaller! That's ideal for me, considering I have 2GB to work with. My fiance could care less, she has 30GB! I'm also smart enough to realize this isn't going to happen.

Palm should wake the hell up

[xtal]

I went back to my m500 because my T3 was too bulky.

Someone needs to release a PDA in the same thinness factor as the nano, and they need to do it stat.

Performing the song publicly

[tepples]

But more importantly: (d) The songs you buy from iTunes Music Store are licensed for private listening only, either inside a home or on headphones. If the phone plays a song when it rings while you are shopping, that's considered performing the song publicly, as far as I can tell from the definition of "publicly" in copyright law.

Re:Performing the song publicly

[TommydCat]

Personally I don't use ring tones for public performances of copyrighted acts. I use them to notify me when someone is calling so I know to answer my phone, a somewhat private action -- unless of course you're assuming that the general public would want to answer my phone as well?

Re:Performing the song publicly

[tepples]

Personally I don't use ring tones for public performances of copyrighted acts. I use them to notify me when someone is calling so I know to answer my phone

So why do so many people use popular music as ringtones on their phones?

Re:Performing the song publicly

[rizzo320]

So why do so many people use popular music as ringtones on their phones?

Because they want to hear something they enjoy listening to when their phone rings rather than being dicatated what to listen to by the phone manufacturer. Not everyone wants to hear the same generic ring tone.

I do see what you're getting at. Some folks do like to use ring tones as a status thing.

Re:Performing the song publicly

[gnu-sucks]

And some people play loud music from their car as a status thing. But I guess that's allowed.

Re:Performing the song publicly

[Golias]

A personalized ring-tone is a fun fashion statement, but a more important reason for a custom ring became very obvious when I was working at a TSA training center a few years ago.

Everybody there was issued their very own mobile phone, and they all had the same generic ringtone. With as many as 30 of us in the staging area sometimes, often with our phones sitting near us on tables or desks, every time one phone rang, every last one of us had to check to see if it was ours.

I now have my phone set to ring with the opening theme from Sailor Moon, which I extracted using iTunes. It has to benefits:

1. It's a ringtone which NOBODY else uses, so I always know when my phone is ringing.
2. It calls me out as an Anime otaku to those who recognize it, which breaks the ice nicely among strangers sometimes.

Re:Performing the song publicly

[Golias]

It has to benefits:

Now I just need a feature on my phone which lets me go back and edit my Slashdot posts, so I can correct moronic typographical errors like that one. :/

Re:Performing the song publicly

[Robaato]

I now have my phone set to ring with the opening theme from Sailor Moon

Please say that at least you're using the original Japanese version...

Re:Performing the song publicly

[meringuoid]

Heh. My phones (I carry around two because I've never been bothered to transfer my old PAYG number to the contract service) have as their ringtones Raspberry Heaven from Azumanga Daioh and Tank from Cowboy Bebop.

Oh, and Soramimi Cake as the alarm.

For a while I had the battle theme from the Both Of You, Dance Like You Want To Win! episode of Evangelion on there, but it got boring fast. And back when my local geek circle was busy working through a dubious Taiwanese boxset of Dragonball Z that someone had bought in, I had We Gotta Pawaa and two other guys had We Were Angels and Cha La, Head Cha La going on.

So, yeah. Hooray for anime ringtones. Distinctive enough so you know it's definitely your phone. Sound perfectly ordinary to normal people. Signal your true nature to other otaku. Totally the way to go.

Wow, the reverse karma police again

[Cybert4]

Without fail, the "I'm gonna lose karma" gain karma. Oh, and I want FLAC. Does that make your head spin?

Re:Wow, the reverse karma police again

[NexFlamma]

You're right. It's almost like cheating. I'm tempted to do my grad thesis on the psychological gaming of Slashdot.

ALE vs. FLAC?

[tepples]

And for ALE is a greater improvement over WAV than OGG Vorbis would be over MP3 or AAC.

But is ALE such a big improvement over FLAC?

Re:ALE vs. FLAC?

[JonathanBoyd]

The point is that there was more reason for Apple to add a lossless format, than another lossy one. Whether they should have gone with FLAC over ALE is another matter entirely, which I feel wholly unqualified to comment on. I don't imagine Apple went with ALE for technical or performance reasons though. Probably a case of NIH, wanting to use their own technology.

Re:ALE vs. FLAC?

[Shawn is an Asshole]

Nope:


> ls -l
-rw-r--r-- 1 shawn shawn 39271522 2006-09-09 17:08 tonight_is_war.flac
-rw-r--r-- 1 shawn shawn 39759682 2006-09-09 17:08 tonight_is_war.m4a
-rw-r--r-- 1 shawn shawn 80737148 2006-09-09 17:08 tonight_is_war.wav

Are there any Vorbis/Theora ASICs?

[tepples]

but at the same time the "voirbis heavy on cpu" argument is also shrinking in the face of mpeg4 video capable mobile players.

A lot of these players don't have a beefy CPU and rely on a dedicated ASIC for MP3, AAC, and MPEG-4 Advanced Simple Profile video decoding. A faster CPU or a second ASIC for Vorbis and Theora would drive up the cost of goods significantly.

Re:Are there any Vorbis/Theora ASICs?

[usrusr]

well, rockbox shows us that many of those boxes are fast enough to decode ogg, but one could probably expect a slightly shorter battery runtime (which could theoretically be offset by using a lower bitrate to reduce drive access, at least with hdd players). but of course you are right about the cpu not pushing all the weight of something like mpeg4 itself. the question is wether the specialist hardware is just some black box where the general purpose cpu sends in a shorter bitstream and receives a longer bitstream or if it's just some kind of offload engine for certain typical subtasks. the latter could help vorbis decoding as well as any other decoding.

but the most telling thing is the high number of ogg-aware no-name (or less-than-ipod-brand) players out there, these days nearly every piece of plastic offered in the mid price region seems to have ogg somewhere in the codec list.

or codec modules

[FlippyTheSkillsaw]

Sure, it would be more work for them, but the people behind OGG Vorbis are keen on getting support, so I'm sure they would be more than happy to help. They already provide sample code, and may provide more than that, which means that Apple has a really easy job of adding the support.

It seems more likely that Apple would release, or someone will hack open, ways to add codec modules. I imagine that iPods already do codecs in a modular way, since it would make development a lot easier.

I might even buy one if I could play OGG and encode to Speex on the fly.

Sansas support ogg?

[Foerstner]

I need something that will play on both my Sansa e250, and my fiance's iPod

I'm looking at the manual, and it only mentions MP3, WMA, and Secure WMA. "Other file types need to be converted to these formats."

Copying songs from iPod to computer

[evilRhino]

Use Yamipod. There's an option within the program to copy a song from your library to your computer. I use it all the time.

4:3 Television Content?

[mr_zorg]

iTunes video sales success to date comes wholly from 4:3 aspect ratio television content, which held less risk for content holders, because consumers already have free access to it on broadcast day.

Let us not forget that most of that prime time programming is already shot and aired for free in 16:9 HD as well. This argument doesn't fly. Why not start offering 16:9 HD programming too?

What I think the Nano replacement will be.

[MtViewGuy]

1. It will use a new case design derived from the old iPod Mini case but in a smaller form factor, with scratchproof materials for the case and display. It will be about the size of the Sandisk Sansa e200 series portable music player.

2. The display will be larger than the current Nano display, which will allow the playback of short 4:3 aspect ratio video clips.

3. Flash memory storage will be 8 GB, 6 GB and possibly 4 GB.

4. Apple may offer an AC adapter standard so the new iPod model can be charged without using USB port power to recharge the battery.

5. Apple may offer a protective carrying case as standard.

Don't expect the true video iPod (aka. vPod) to arrive until MacWorld Expo in January 2007.

Please mod parent up

[Anonymous Coward]

Please mod parent up. The GP is partially correct about 8kHz audio as some headsets only support that but it is not a limitation of Bluetooth.

Stating that this "limitation" is what is keeping BT out of the iPod is pure FUD.

obligatory complaint

[Myopic]

still waiting for gapless audio.

what other players feature gapless audio?

Re:obligatory complaint

[Anonymous Coward]

The Sony players have always supported gap-less. Though only if you rip your CD as ATRAC.

"little Newton or Palm Pilot or something"

[dafing]

Percisely!

I've been dreaming of the "iPad", a little touch screen based device to control computers etc. I got the idea from using a clicker for a textbased game, it gets boring clicking numbers as they come up onscreen, so i thought "why not have this little device to do this kind of stuff with?". The way i imagine it, it would be about the thickness of an iPod Nano and about the same size as the current iPod, and just ALL touchscreen. It would have limited ram etc, and would just use its touchscreen, wifi and bluetooth to interface with other computers etc.

Imagine, the technician who monitors the servers through dashboard type widgets on the crapper, or being able to txt on your bluetooth phone by writing with the stylus which sends it to the phone, you could have your phone in your pocket and just have your iPad vibrate and have the message come up on it. I would really want this device to be cheap, say, $50 american for example. i know i would buy one if they cost the equiv of that. It would have to be cheap though, and simple, just the wifi/bt and the touchscreen to control everything.

Re:"little Newton or Palm Pilot or something"

[ceoyoyo]

Hm.... good idea. I'm not sure you could do it for $50 though. I'm looking forward to having a piece of wifi touch sensitive electronic paper. Control your house computer from it, read (served from the computer), whatever. The thing would be dead stupid, just enough electronics to let a real computer connect to it and draw the screen.

Re:"little Newton or Palm Pilot or something"

[dafing]

thanks for the comment, Id be willing to pay $100 of my money, the NZD, and i roughly halfed for american although it may be closer to $70 american, i just went with the lowest possible, afterall its a DREAM product lol!

Yeah, I share your dream too, i think its silly that people say that "Apple should do this and only Apple can save us from that..", who knows, maybe they will sell electronic books next for their new epaper device???

With my idea though, I hear that to add bluetooth and wifi to the PS3 costs about a buck, im sure intel has the right chips etc for everything and then theres just the touchscreen to handle. Im trying to be realistic as possible here, as i dont want the iPod to get stuffed up having new features thrown in, i already hate how iTunes does videos etc now, but iMedia doesnt sound as good eh? maybe "iDrop" in which it could actually stand for "Delivery Really accelerates Our Profits!" lol.

Back to my idea, it would be cool if it could have a very basic speaker too, maybe vibrate, but no streaming music etc, i hope the iPod does get that as it really makes sense, note that i myself DO NOT use wifi, but im hoping to when the need comes around. I think the iPod should just show up in iTunes and be able to be sent music just as you can play through remote speakers. That doesnt belong in the business/personal control whatever niche that my "iPad" belongs in.

SLASHMOB!

[dafing]

LOL!

Corporate s/w development

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a lead software engineer at either Microsoft or Apple - you decide which. Posting anonymously for obvious reasons...

Our most recent product cycle had a 6-month turnaround. The time was divided up as follows:

  - 1.5 months for feature selection, spec-writing, and prototyping
  - 1.5 months for development
  - 1 month for required bug-fixes to the previous codebase
  - 2 months for QA and in-depth testing by the whole team (this obviously includes bug-fixing when they're found)

So, on a 6-month cycle, we had ~6 weeks of time to do new work. That work was closely monitored - every checkin is code-reviewed and cross-checked against either the spec or the bug-report as part of the committment to overall quality control. Trying to get unapproved code into the codebase is a disciplinary offence.

Of course management want the best 'bang for the buck', so the feature-list is always pushing the limits of what can be done anyway... And you want the engineering team to just throw in a new codec ? Even if they *could*, perhaps they're sick of working 6 or 7 days a week with long hours. Perhaps they just don't care enough about the wants of some tiny minority, and perhaps the miniscule cross-section of /. to the target market means they're justified in not caring...

But none of that matters to the average /.'er. They see Microsoft and Apple as corporate entities with agendas, not as groups of people working hard to produce the best they can. All you ever see, as an employee at Microsoft or Apple is a childish "waah, waah, waah. We want more" - irrespective of how feasible it is to actually produce more.

My personal approach is that I don't criticise someone until I've tried to do what they do. Some things look as though they ought to be easy, but that apparent simplicity just betrays my own lack of knowledge of the subject. In day-to-day things, I've learnt to keep my mouth shut until I know enough about something to contribute meaningfully. On internet forums, that sort of good manners is just ... missing.

Enough already. Well, no-one will ever read this anyway, given it's an AC post...