Slashdot Mirror
iPod To Eventually Hold All the Video In the World?
An anonymous reader writes "A senior Google exec has been talking up the prospect of iPods that can hold all the world's media due to the plummeting price of storage and its increasing volume-to-size ratio. Google's VP of European operations, Nikesh Arora, predicts that in as little as just over a decade's time, iPods will be capable of storing 'any video ever produced.'" From the article: "Arora believes, mobile is likely to follow the same path. 'Mobile is not going to be a different thing,' he added — and if the mobile industry is to capitalize on the growth of content, it would be wise to ape the development of the internet. He said: 'The mobile industry has to go through the same phases the internet has gone through... Mobile will have the same learning curve. It would be somewhat foolish to leapfrog the stages the internet went through.'"
Yes, but we'll be stuck watching it on those teeny tiny screens.
Apple: Gee, Google, what are we going to do tonight?
The Google: The same thing we do every night, Apple ... Try to hold ALL THE VIDEO IN THE WORLD!
I hear there's rumors on the Slashdots
Personal storage is something we do now, because networking isn't cool enough. In ten years, it's entirely possible that networking will have increased to the point where the idea of keeping a local copy of ANYTHING will seem weird.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
What exactly is the estimated capacity for "all the world's [media]". This sounds like one heck of a bold statement when the numbers at the moment are unfathomable for holding a back catalogue of everything broadcast on network television and everything from blockbusters to B-movies from 1890 on, let alone net-generated videos, cable and alternative delivery methods.
New content is produced all the time, content is also likely to be stored at a better quality as long as space keeps increasing. I'm looking forward to the day of 80GB nanos, to me the nano is the ideal size, any smaller and it'd be awkward to control.
I'm really tempted to save that article just so I can pull it out and show how naive people were back in 2006. If there is one thing time has taught me, it's that the volume of information expands in relation to your available storage. I mean 10 years ago one of our 500GB modern hard drives could have probably stored all of the video available on the internet with room to spare.
I do agree that an iPod like device could probably hold enough video (high quality video at that) to well exceed its battery life however (modern iPods have no trouble doing that with music).
I read the internet for the articles.
Imagine a video iPod with a nice little screen (640x480) and enough store for your entire video and music collection.
You can carry it with you anywhere.
Useful?
I can usefully take music with me, because I can *listen* while I physically perform other tasks - like being at the gym, sitting down at work while I code.
But *video?*
Video is much less useful, because to *watch* you can't be doing other things - your eyes are occupied.
So I think it's only useful for being portable in situations where you have to sit and *wait* and cannot do other things.
For me that means just one thing; waiting for the bus and maybe when I'm on the bus, if it doesn't make me feel ill.
For others, I can only imagine similar situations, e.g. being stuck on a mode of transport.
"I think that enough space to hold all the world's video should be enough for everyone"
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It is correct as long as the ratio is storage volume / physical size. It is a bad choice of terms since it could also mean physical volume / storage size.
The compression scheme has been available for years. It is the decompression that has proved to be a little tricky.