Slashdot Mirror


How the iPod Touch Works

starexplorer2001 writes "The iPod Touch isn't in stores yet, but HowStuffWorks has a nice summary of how the 'touch' part of the iPod Touch works. Very similar to how the iPhone works, without those pesky rebates! From the article: 'The iPod touch also has a few other features that iPod enthusiasts had hoped to see on standard iPod models. Some users hoped for a wirelessly enabled iPod so they could synch their music or share files with friends over a Bluetooth or WiFi connection. The iPod touch is the first iPod to have wireless capability, although it doesn't use it to synch with a computer or friends' iPods. Instead, you can use it to browse the Web, watch YouTube videos or download music from a WiFi-specific iTunes Music Store. With its widescreen display and WiFi capability, the iPod touch might sound like a big step up from older iPod models. But the iPod touch isn't for everyone.'"

43 of 208 comments (clear)

  1. CmdrTaco's dream come true! by nacturation · · Score: 4, Funny

    They finally listened to his comments! Now with wireless and *more* space than a Nomad.

    --
    Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    1. Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      The comments on that thread make for interesting reading today - I particularly like this one (modded +4 insightful)

      Raise your hand if you have iTunes ...

      Raise your hand if you have a FireWire port ...

      Raise your hand if you have both ...

      Raise your hand if you have $400 to spend on a cute Apple device ...

      There is Apple's market. Pretty slim, eh? I don't see many sales in the future of iPod.
    2. Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You do realize that comment was true at the time, right? Two things have changed since then:

      iTunes now runs under windows.

      iPods now only work with USB. (I once made the mistake of using a Firewire iPod cable with a 5G iPod. The iPod itself will display an error message. It simply doesn't support Firewire any more.)

      It was only AFTER Apple supported Windows and the iPod gained USB support that the iPod took off. Before then it was only a curiosity enjoyed by Apple fanbois.

    3. Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! by Mattintosh · · Score: 4, Informative

      It simply doesn't support Firewire any more.

      The first time I heard this, I was shocked and dismayed. Every time I've heard it since, I've been angry.

      Via USB, my iPod takes 15 to 20 minutes to transfer my 18 GB of music.

      Via Firewire, the same operation takes 8 minutes.

      Why am I forced to put up with inferior mechanisms when I replace it? New iPods suck ass because of stupid people that don't know that Firewire is better. This isn't just simple anger, this is pure hate. I hate idiots and the stupidity they cause.

      4G iPod forever! (Or at least until Apple puts Firewire support back in.)

    4. Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! by Dachannien · · Score: 2, Funny

      They finally listened to his comments! Now with wireless and *more* space than a Nomad.

      Plus, it has paradox-absorbing crumple zones.

    5. Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! by johnny+cashed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      2G iPod forever. It even has a "real" (full size) firewire port.

    6. Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The reason Firewire is faster is that everything is its own device on the network. USB requires a host. It's also why USB requires more CPU. However, that firewire chip isn't small. When Apple had to choose between firewire chip or video chip, they choose the video.

    7. Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! by Neo_piper · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Reason given at the time was that the Physical Size of the Firewire chips was holding back the reduction in size

    8. Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! by cybereal · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Whenever the topic of mobile video comes up, my response is something akin to "who cares?"

      Number of videos I've purchased from iTunes: about 5 or 6
      Number of videos I've purchased from iTunes because I wanted a video: 1 (the rest were included with albums that I bought for the music)
      Number of videos I keep sync'ed to my iPod: 0
      Number of videos I would keep sync'ed to my iPod if my iPod could play videos: 0

      I want Firewire back, dammit.

      I care.

      Number of videos I've purchased from iTunes: 119 (with at least another 15 on pre-order or in completion of active seasons)
      Number of videos I've purchased from iTunes because I wanted a video: 119 (with at least another 15 on pre-order or in completion of active seasons)
      Number of videos I keep sync'ed to my iPod: 5
      Number of videos I would keep sync'ed to my iPod if my iPod could play videos: 5

      And for the questions you ignored...

      When I would actually watch videos on my iPod: Every day on the train; every time I find myself at the mall with the wife and she needs to try things on in the dressing room; Waiting in line for things like popular movies or concerts; miscellaneous situations not worth listing

      Just because your life doesn't seem to convey a use of this doesn't mean others don't, and the fact that you're posting on /. is a good indicator that you aren't the target market. I used to be not the target market, but things have changed in the last few years as I finally adopted technology into my life as a way to make it more enjoyable, instead of something to hack and gripe about all the time. Considering the fact that my iPod is my iPhone, the chances of having my videos with me in a random moment of boredom are high enough to motivate me to use this method for watching my usual shows. I had to pick up the wife from the train one day, and while I was on time, she missed the train and that left me waiting for 35 minutes with nothing to do. Booyah, one episode of The Daily Show and one of Aqua Teen Hunger Force and the time had flown right by.

      Another consideration is how much cheaper it is for me to buy my shows on iTMS or DVD than to pay a subscription fee to a cable carrier every single month. I rip my own DVD's with Handbrake, and with a few clever playlists I have everything I want to watch synced to my Apple TV magically, including extra stuff when I'm in the mood for "reruns" and a few video podcasts that give me highly casual viewing choices. A subset of this is what I sync to my iPhone. So when I am caught up waiting and watch a show on my iPod, I come home and sync the iPod, the Apple TV is automatically updated in reponse to that sync, so both the iPhone and iPod are updated with the next episode(s) of the show I want to watch. Magical. It's this convenience and ubiquity without the downsides of attempting to stream over our increasingly unreliable Internet that further draws me to this distribution methodology.

      And despite having firewire ports on every computer, my experiences with firewire over time are that the implementations of nearly every firewire device are terrible. I had an external drive with both USB 2.0 and Firewire (DVD±RW drive) and it would fail burns on firewire but never on USB 2.0, regardless of which computer was in use. Then an external HDD that would constantly end up with corruption with Firewire usage but never with USB 2.0, and the list goes on. Firewire is an interesting idea and it's nice to have the option, but I hardly think it matters for something like an iPod. It doesn't help than almost no firewire devices have an additional port to support daisy chaining like they ALL SHOULD.

      On top of this, I don't understand the complaint. If you're using an iPod, and you are using iTunes then you're probably not copying the entire contents of the device over very frequently. If you aren't using iTunes, then you're doing it wrong. It's great that people have hacked up softwar

      --
      I read the script, and I think it would help my character's motivation if he was on fire. -Bender
  2. But does it have Bluetooth or not? by Brit_in_the_USA · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anyone taken one apart and verified if there is bluetooth hardware in it?

    Stereo bluetoth headphone support is long overdue for ipods. If hte hardware is there software coudl be round the corner?

    1. Re:But does it have Bluetooth or not? by MBCook · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What's so important about BT headphones? I'm sorry but that is one thing that I don't see a big deal about. That's just extra power that my iPod will be wasting and another thing to charge/replace batteries in (the headphones). There are a few circumstances I can see (jogging, maybe). But I don't think it is a big necessary thing for most people.

      That said, if the BT hardware is in there (like it is in the iPhone), I see no excuse for not including support for it (because all the hardware is there and I can see people using). I just don't see it as important enough to put the hardware in.

      Now wireless syncing, I would be big on.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    2. Re:But does it have Bluetooth or not? by grimflick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bluetooth could instantly turn this into a great wifi phone or skype phone if you will. On Another front I want to know what processor it runs off of and what it's comparitive performance is with respest to desktop processors I have known ...

      --
      'Only a Barbarian believes that his tribes customs are the laws of nature'
  3. Yes it is by Selfbain · · Score: 2, Informative
    --
    Well, it has never been successfully tested.
  4. How the iPod Touch Works? by svendsen · · Score: 4, Funny

    it works by touching it...duh

    1. Re: How the iPod Touch Works? by garcia · · Score: 2, Funny

      it works by touching it...duh

      Well, most of the Slashdot is very well aware that they themselves "work by touching it" but for use of their own devices outside of that realm, they need to have a little more in-depth manual and this is exactly that! ;-)

    2. Re: How the iPod Touch Works? by svendsen · · Score: 3, Funny

      You just put the image of slashdot users touching themselves into my head....after I am done barfing remind me to put you on my enemies list for that :-) lol

  5. But what if it's in my pocket? by TheCycoONE · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of the great features of the clicky wheel is that you can grab your ipod in your pocket and adjust the volume or skip tracks easily without looking at the device. On a multi-touch interface you're going to have to look at the screen to know what you are touching, which will make it a lot harder to use in your pocket or while driving.

    1. Re:But what if it's in my pocket? by MrP-(at+work) · · Score: 2, Informative

      I know with my iPhone I can easily click the volume up/down button on the side in my pocket and I can stop/start/skip ahead songs using the button/microphone on the headphones. (which can also answer calls, send to vm, place on hold, etc). iPod touch probably has a similar feature.

      --
      [an error occurred while processing this directive]
    2. Re:But what if it's in my pocket? by samkass · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Apple still sells iPods with clicky wheels if this is important to you, but the clicky wheel and the huge screen won't both fit, so you have to choose. You can get accessories that let you go forward/back without touching the iPod at all, but of course they cost extra, and most car models these days offer optional iPod integration that lets you control them from the car stereo for car use.

      --
      E pluribus unum
  6. Not a PDA replacement... by porcupine8 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I was originally super-excited about the iPod Touch as a PDA, but I just found out that you can't enter calendar entries on it, you can only sync them from your computer. :( Oh well, now I don't have to be sad about the price!

    The part of this article that I found most interesting is that you need to use your skin for the touch screen to work - that kinda rules out any sort of future handwriting recognition.

    I guess I just really want Apple to give me a real PDA - an iNewton - instead of an iPod that looks kinda like a PDA.

    --
    Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
    1. Re:Not a PDA replacement... by chis101 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The part of this article that I found most interesting is that you need to use your skin for the touch screen to work - that kinda rules out any sort of future handwriting recognition.


      Not necessarily. I wouldn't expect to see handwriting recognition, but you have to use your skin because touchpads detect the electrical difference caused by your finger. Non-conductors won't work for a touchpad. That doesn't mean, however, that there can't be a special pen that can be used to write on it (like PDAs have)
    2. Re:Not a PDA replacement... by porcupine8 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Aaaaand he also said publicly many times that Apple wasn't making a phone. I don't trust anything he denies in public.

      I read somewhere that Apple was approached by a team wanting them to create a tablet for medical use - and they said that touch-screen technology wasn't up to where it needed to be for such a device to be as good as they'd want to make it. They didn't say that they would never consider such a device, or that people wouldn't want it - just that it wasn't currently feasible.

      By PDA, I just mean I want something that I can enter scheduling and to do info into on the go, rather than at my computer. It doesn't seem like it would be hard to make the iPod touch do this, and probably a third party will do it soon.

      Now, a true tablet Mac, that's really my dream-come-true, and I think it will happen eventually. No, not everyone wants or needs one, but I think there's enough of a niche market for it that if Apple could do it really well, they'd do it. But as the anecdote above shows, they won't do it until they know they can do it better than anyone else.

      --
      Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
    3. Re:Not a PDA replacement... by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Aaaaand he also said publicly many times that Apple wasn't making a phone. I don't trust anything he denies in public. That's right. While he denied Apple was making a phone, he said that Apple wouldn't make a phone because he didn't think they would do well in cell phone market -- something that seems to be proving itself out since Apple slashed iPhone prices and introduced the iTouch because iPod users said they wanted an iPhone for the media player. Something changed his mind about that, and maybe his original thoughts were correct, maybe not, only time will tell.

      However, his reasons for not doing a PDA were well-justified. He just thinks that cell phones will be the devices to carry this information in the future, not PDAs. And if you look at the PDA market, this seems to be true because, by far, the largest segment of that market are -- wait for it -- smart cell phones.

      IOW, Jobs was right in 2003 and if he still thinks the same way, he's right now.

  7. Storage is the biggest limitation by Sciros · · Score: 3, Insightful

    $400 for 16 gigabytes of storage is simply not good enough for a lot of people with large music libraries who like to have 30-40 albums to listen to on command.

    I like to watch video on these portable players (I have a Cowon A2 myself), so there's also seasons of anime or whatever to take up 4-8 gigs each.

    In a year or so, when these things will hold 64 Gigs of flash memory, they will be great purchases for someone like myself. Until then, they're not even an option. And that's the single biggest "improvement" I'm looking forward to in future iPods. (Though I'll probably just grab a Q5 when it's available.)

    But hey gotta start somewhere.

    --
    I like basketball!!1!
    1. Re:Storage is the biggest limitation by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The "I MUST have every single song in my collection at all times!!" demand is such a red herring.

      Well, these days it's somewhat reasonable to expect a device to exist that will hold the music collections of everyone who isn't a professional DJ. That said, such a device exists: the full-size regular iPod. What's not reasonable is to expect every music player on the market to hold all the music you could possibly own.

    2. Re:Storage is the biggest limitation by ajs · · Score: 2, Informative

      Either you use a low bitrate, or listen to short track (or both). My music collection is just over 2000 tracks at the moment, and is just under 16GB. It will probably go over 16GB by the time I get a new iPod; I've been waiting for a 24GB iPod Nano. I took a random sampling of my mp3s which includes one 44MB concert, 2 x 26ish MB symphonies, and a plethora of other files. They average 5569258 bytes or about 3000 songs per 16GB.

      If you're using an aggressively large bitrate, then perhaps you are seeing only 2/3rds of the song capacity that I am. That's not outside the bounds of probability at all. I've ripped mine with a mix of tools over the years, and it looks like I'm averaging about 144 Kbits/s, with most being 128 or 192 Kb/s.
  8. Deliciously hackable by maczealot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just as the iPhone's "exclusive" with AT&T was only a speed bump to those who wanted to use it on any network so too will the iTouch's inability to share music wirelessly with friends only exist for a short time.

    I expect there to be multiple hacks for sharing music wirelessly with friends within a month after it hits stores. And to be honest I'm starting to expect this kind of wink-wink nudge-nudge release from Apple. They can't release a product the way consumers want it so they get the recording industry/telecom industy to agree to "rules" that just make their devices likely targets of benign hacking.

    Now, I KNOW what my account name is but you HAVE to admit that Apple's use of the greater software community pwns Microsoft who regularly attracts NEGATIVE hacking.

    And just to prove what a fanboy I am: This is the first device since the Newton that I'm wetting my pants over.

  9. But... by OfficialReverendStev · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wonderful to know how it works. But will it blend?

    --
    A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything. - Neitzsche
  10. Re:really by Poromenos1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The thing is that it has 5 times less storage than the older iPod (80 GB). Sure it's got touch and wireless, but that just means no tactile feedback, no wireless syncing (I have many computers around the house, even my mobile has a browser) and less space at a higher price. Not the most attractive deal.

    --
    Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
  11. I'm waiting a bit by TeamSPAM · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As a long time Apple fanboy, I'll invoke the don't buy the rev a rule on the iPod Touch. To an extent, the Touch is what I wanted when I saw the iPhone. Unfortunately, the storage space isn't big enough for my music collection. I'd like to have at least 32GB of storage available before I think about buying one.

    --
    Brought to you by Team SPAM! where we believe: "Information in the noise!"
  12. This should be a short article by Itchyeyes · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sounds like this would be a pretty short article: "Exactly the same way the iPhone does, but without the phone."

  13. This Slashvertisment rates a 4.7 out of 5 by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This Slashvertisment rates a 4.7 out of 5.

    The (product) isn't in stores yet, but (whatever) has a nice summary of how the ("gee whiz" feature) of the (product) works.


    Excellent opening statement. It stimulates Desire, which we all know is the precursor to in the marketing "AIDA" scheme. (And when you release the product, just submit another article.)

    With its (feature 2) and (feature 3), the (product) might sound like a big step up from (previous model of product). But the (product) isn't for everyone.


    Great introduction of the features, especially the "big step up" part. And you've even given your target audience a reason to click into the submitted link too. (You've suggested there are people this product may not be perfect for, not that anyone reading this on Slashdot would fall into that "un-hip" category.)

    Fellow Slashvertisers take note - this format can be applied to your next submission too!

  14. Pesky Rebate? by BMonger · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.apple.com/iphone/storecredit/

    That's a very pesky "rebate" which I received within 5 minutes of clicking the link.

    Not 6-8 weeks if I'm lucky.

  15. Give Up on The Wireless Hacking by asphaltjesus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Let's pause for a moment to inject a dose of engineering reality.

    1. We're talking about a low-power device with very limited programming capacity. That's different from the storage capacity.
    2. How, in technical terms will files be shared?

    Let's say a hacker can use the wireless+dhcp client. Then what? A bonjour client perhaps? Maybe, but bonjour just advertises services. So, put an ftp server behind that maybe? Great! The hacker will need, Bonjour libraries and all the underlying dependencies, an ftp server and an ftp client and enough cpu/memory to run it all. It reminds me of a line from the remade Oceans 11, "Let's say you rob Terry Benedict's casino. You're still in the middle of the f*cking desert!"

    --
    Got Trader Joe's? friendwich.com RSS feeds work now!
  16. eBook? by fxj · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Can you use it as an e-book reader?
    or at least store html-pages on it?

    1. Re:eBook? by radish · · Score: 3, Informative

      Assuming it's like the iPhone (and everything I've read says it is) then no - there's no way to store anything on it other than loading music/video etc through iTunes.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

  17. iPod Touch == Crippled iPhone by Coppit · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They disabled appointment entry for the calendar widget. That's really too bad, since I was hoping that this device could be the convergence of my Palm T|X and my iPod. Does anyone know if they crippled any other features of the iPhone? I would have bought one if it truly was an iPhone minus the phone. (I refuse to give AT&T $1500 on top of the not-even-subsidized cost of the iPhone.)

    I guess the other thing I'm waiting for is an API for programmers. I like to store my passwords and PINs using encryption on my device. (1) Storing them on someone's server using their Safari-based web app won't work, and (2) Hacks people are using to write native apps aren't sanctioned and may stop working in the future. Sigh... C'mon Apple, open it up!

  18. Re:utter bs by pandrijeczko · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Anyone thats says they "need" to carry around 100GB of music is talking utter crap.

    I don't "need" to carry around 100GB of music with me - I "like" to have it with me because I listen to a lot of music, it sits in a small DVD case on 25 DVDs alongside my laptop so I can copy stuff off to my MP3 player any time I like.

    I'm willing to bet that most people with more than 30GB haven't listened to every song they own.

    Wrong. I don't watch much TV, I have music on in the background most of the time and generally find an hour or two each day to just sit and listen to some music.

    To be honest I think it's more of an ego thing for people like the parent poster, they need to have as much music as possible with them at all times.

    Wrong again. 25 DVDs in a small case is simple enough to stick in a laptop bag and forget about. It's just "easy" to have my music collection with me most times, it makes no odds what other people think.

    These type of people download the entire discography of the doors (about 30 albums) just to say they have it, not because they love the doors..

    Who said anything about downloading? Yep, I download from BitTorrent or Usenet occasionally to preview an album - but if it's good, I buy the CD and make my own MP3s, if it's crap then I delete it. MP3s are just a convenience for me, I much prefer the disc to play in a reasonably good hifi - but I've never paid to download music and never will.

    Suffice it to say, I don't earn enough to buy the entire catalogue of an artist. I buy what I like, and that's it.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  19. Re:utter bs by sam_paris · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't "need" to carry around 100GB of music with me - I "like" to have it with me because I listen to a lot of music, it sits in a small DVD case on 25 DVDs alongside my laptop so I can copy stuff off to my MP3 player any time I like. Just a minute, this debate is about mp3 players, if you choose to carry around 25DVD's at all times that's your problem. Maybe you should think about buying a 100GB+ mp3 player.

    Even though I know you won't ever agree, i'm sure in that 100GB of music there are plenty of songs that you can't remember when you last listened to them.

    Wrong. I don't watch much TV, I have music on in the background most of the time and generally find an hour or two each day to just sit and listen to some music.

    If you have about 100GB of music that equals over 1000 hours of playback. If you listen to only an hour a day, that means to listen to your whole collection would take OVER A YEAR. That means, that there must be some songs you barely ever listen to. Straight from your own mouth!

    Who said anything about downloading? Yep, I download from BitTorrent or Usenet occasionally to preview an album - but if it's good, I buy the CD and make my own MP3s, if it's crap then I delete it. MP3s are just a convenience for me, I much prefer the disc to play in a reasonably good hifi - but I've never paid to download music and never will. Suffice it to say, I don't earn enough to buy the entire catalogue of an artist. I buy what I like, and that's it.


    Yeah, sure you bought all that music.. if you dont earn enough to buy an entire back catalogue, you dont earn enough to have 100GB which, is probably over 1000 albums..

  20. Re:utter bs by pandrijeczko · · Score: 3, Informative
    Even though I know you won't ever agree, i'm sure in that 100GB of music there are plenty of songs that you can't remember when you last listened to them.

    I can tell you that I've listened to them all at some point, I can't tell you an exact day. My collection's a bit fluid anyway, in as much as there's the occasional CD I've lost interest in that I resell on eBay but I do get through them. Sure, having an album on in the background isn't truly "listening" to it but I do have music on around 4 hours a day.

    Yeah, sure you bought all that music.. if you dont earn enough to buy an entire back catalogue, you dont earn enough to have 100GB which, is probably over 1000 albums..

    I'm in my 40s, I've been listening to the likes of Yes, Genesis, Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd since I was about 13 years of age, as well as rock I now listen to blues, Motown, some electronic stuff like Tangerine Dream and Mark Shreeve and even a bit of classical.

    I never buy CDs in high street shops, look for the best prices and buy used on eBay and in local shops. I can ***100%*** guarantee you that I have 900+ original, non-copied CDs. With that size of collection, there is no point my downloading and hoarding stuff because I just wouldn't find the time to listen to it - like I said, it's a great way of previewing stuff that I can't hear on the radio, nothing more.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  21. Re:utter bs by Sciros · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But so what if you only listen to a song once a year? There's something to be said for having as much music available to you at all times as possible so when the mood to listen to a random song *does* hit you, you can do so without having to access your PC for it.

    As for saying 1000 gigs of music is impossible to have without piracy or whatever, I encourage you to check out something like ocremix.org or vgmix or whatever. Lots of free-to-download music out there if you like that kind of stuff and know where to look :-)

    No-one is talking about life-or-death necessity here. It's not like you can't breathe if your iPod holds less than 40 gigs. It's simply a matter of convenience. At the moment some devices offer the kind of convenience folks with large music libraries are looking for, while others aren't.

    --
    I like basketball!!1!
  22. Easy Explanation by egyptiankarim · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How the iPod works is easy... 1. Create a recognizable branding. 2. Dedicate yourself to the production of pretty consumer electronics with nifty functionality. 3. Appeal to a small but fiercely loyal fan base. 4. Market the HELL out of said products. 5. Profit.

    --
    Eek!
  23. Re:really by bozone · · Score: 2, Insightful

    then don't buy the touch.... buy the classic that has twice the storage of the older iPod... you have choices ... including not getting one if it doesn't meet your needs

    --
    "Hatred is the coward's revenge for being intimidated" ...George Bernard Shaw