Slashdot Mirror
Apple Updates iPhone and iPod Touch
u-bend writes "With little publicity Apple has released new, higher-capacity models of the iPhone and iPod Touch. The new iPhone boasts 16 GB of storage and is priced at $499 (the 8 GB model remains at $399), and the new iPod Touch has 32 GB, also priced at $499. Although the price is still pretty hefty, it indicates that the capacity/price ratio on these wireless flash-based players is starting to move in the right direction."
Seriously, who fscking cares if Apple is doing a normal product refresh? I bet Dell updates the memory/hdd/etc on serveral of it's products every week, don't see that making frontpage news on Slashdot. It even scrolled across foxnews for God's sake, how insane is that? Has everyone drunk that much of Steve's acid spiked Kool-Aid?
This isn't a new product, it is just a ramp in the flash. Something EVERY flash based product does several times per year as prices and capacity get better. It is like announcing water is still wet.
Democrat delenda est
The iPhone is the same size as a current BlackBerry and millions of BB users don't find the phones bulky or fragile. The only people that think they are fragile are those that freak out on the first scratch. My BlackBerry 8830 has been kicked across the room and dropped on tile numerous times. Is it pristine? Oh no. But it still works just fine. When I get an iPhone it will be the same way. Battered and bruised, but I bet it still works.
My complaint on both products: No A2DP. Why...WHY?!! I'd go get an iTouch today if it had it. I want an A2DP player for the gym but also want an iTouch.
Just justify not having one because they cost too much and you do not have the money allocated for it. :)
Yeah, this is hard.
How about:
1) Requires iTunes.
2) Doesn't work with Linux.
3) Is laden with DRM.
4) Doesn't support popular codecs like OGG.
5) ONLY supports iTunes Music Store and not other, cheaper services.
6) Doesn't allow simple drag-and-drop access to copy music.
7) Software is locked down on the device.
8) Non-removable storage.
9) Non-removable battery.
10) Costs $500, much more than cheaper, more open-devices do.
There's more, but you get the idea. It's over-priced Apple crap. You can get a cheaper device that works just as well.
Go with the "I want a device I can plug any old pair of headphones into."
The iPhone (and I assume the Touch), have the headphone jack slightly recessed the plug won't work, unless it is straight with no excess rubber/plastic around the plug.
Stupid design, all they needed to do was not recess the plug, but right now the hardware design is broken.
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
I care, so just relax already. I think a 32 GB ipod without a price increase also is worth at least looking at. Sure, it's only a normal bump in a product, but so what? I'm interested, I'm sure lots of others are interested too: The New York Times has this up today as well. You Apple haters sure are tedious, not every article needs to be about the end of the world you know.
Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
Protip: You don't need to load every single song in your collection on your iPod. Smart playlists are your friend.
3) Not true. It can use a particular set of DRM but it is not necessary.
5) Not true. Amazon, eMusic, Lunchbox, Bleep etc. all work fine (or did you want to use DRM laden Napster, Rhapsody, etc.)
The rest all come down to preference and individual feature requirements. The only one that is a show stopper for me is #10.
What is up with you Drag and Drop people. If you were a real man you would use the command line, not some wimpy GUI. Or, like normal people with a life, you would get over you OCD fetish with file management.
But by all means let frothing continue.
1) Works with libgpod based programs (e.g. gtkpod or Amarok)
2) Which is developed primarily on Linux
3) Which you don't have to employ, but allows you to use the online shop with the most extensive range of products
4) Ogg isn't a popular codec. At best, it is popular container format, which it isn't neither.
5) Works with every store, which provides MP3s or AAC, which contary to Ogg Vorbis ARE popular formats.
6) See 1)
7) For which, for some unknown reasons, exist a very active developer community, and a shitload open source software. Maybe even more than for any other portable player, thankyouverymuch.
8), 9), 10) Point taken, but mainly a matter of taste.
"Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
You don't buy a Touch as merely a music/video player.
If that's all you want, then there's other cheaper players.
You buy one because it's just a really really cool gadget.
People make lists of what is lacking in iPhones and Touchs, but if you actually use one, you'll understand.
The UI, the form factor... it's just a well designed, lovable, Apple thing.
When this mysterious SDK comes out and people start making quality programs for it then it will really shine.
It's odd that most people are willing to pay $20,000 for a car they drive 30 minutes a day but they aren't willing to spend $400 on a phone that they use all the time. Most people benefit more from having a good cell phone than a good car, and the difference between a good phone and a crappy phone is much more pronounced than the difference between a good car and crappy car.
Now, if they offered a slightly thicker iPod touch with the hard drive from the 160 GB iPod classic for $500, I'd probably bite.
--
As would I, and so would many others who like the idea of storing ALL their media on the their PMP. Hell they could even call it the iPod Touch HD, which would be bound to sell some units because HD is all the rage right now.
Sadly I don't think that Apple will introduce any new iPods with HDs in them other than updates to the classic
The iPod Touch does not use a hard drive to store data. It's flash memory based.
Seriously, how nit-picky do you need to get? Do you remind people that they're not really burning a DVD, but merely heating the dye on the disc?
True
2) Doesn't work with Linux.
Also true
3) Is laden with DRM.
Hardly laden with DRM. It plays MP3s, WAVs, AIFF and AAC all without requiring DRM. It just so happens that it ALSO plays DRMed AAC iTunes Store tracks.
4) Doesn't support popular codecs like OGG.
OGG is not a popular codec
5) ONLY supports iTunes Music Store and not other, cheaper services.
Rubbish! Amazon music store and anyone who supports MP3 works fine with it
6) Doesn't allow simple drag-and-drop access to copy music.
True, but then who actually cares?
7) Software is locked down on the device.
True for the moment. The SDK will be available this month.
8) Non-removable storage.
Yep also true but doesn't matter to most people.
9) Non-removable battery.
See my answer to 8
10) Costs $500, much more than cheaper, more open-devices do.
Actually the iPod touch starts at $300 which is $200 less than your fanatical comment
You can get a cheaper device that works just as well.
For example?
The problem with that comparison is that spending $20,000 on a car is one of the stupidest things that young people do. It's already an absurd amount of money, and if they figured out how much it actually cost them in future, if they would instead invest some of that money, then the decision to buy that car is completely brain-damaged.
So then what your argument is saying is essentially "If you're so stupid that you would do X, then how can you not do Y, which is not nearly as stupid."
I don't know, the Nokia N800 probably comes closest to an iPod Touch.
There really isn't a good comparison to the iPod Touch or iPhone because "elegant design" doesn't translate very well to a bullet point on a comparison chart (hence the famous Slashdot article about the iPod). It really comes down to whether the Apple touch interface, ease of use, and pretty hardware design are worth the extra cost to you or not.
rm -rf
1) Requires iTunes.
:)
This one doesn't hurt me, since I like iTunes. But it's an understandable gripe.
2) Doesn't work with Linux.
I'm sure it will soon. The original iPod didn't work with Linux when it came out and it did shortly after.
3) Is laden with DRM.
Only if you copy DRMed tracks to it. It handles normal MP3s just fine.
4) Doesn't support popular codecs like OGG.
OGG is a popular codec? How come I hardly ever see music encoded in it? How come I have only two ogg files total, which I easily transcoded to MP3 to play on my iPod? If you encoded all your music in a non-well-supported format, that's your problem.
5) ONLY supports iTunes Music Store and not other, cheaper services.
Works fine with Amazon MP3, which is cheaper AND has no DRM. Whee!
6) Doesn't allow simple drag-and-drop access to copy music.
Yes it does. Just set it to not sync automatically and you can drag songs to it from your Library no problem.
7) Software is locked down on the device.
Dev kit is coming soon. Plus it's been cracked anyway.
8) Non-removable storage.
I'll give you this point. An SD card slot would be nice.
9) Non-removable battery.
Li-Ion batteries last a good long time. By the time the battery needs changing I'm sure there will be plenty of third party, inexpensive replacements remaining, all with websites describing the procedure in detail.
10) Costs $500, much more than cheaper, more open-devices do.
I'll give you this point too. This really is a shiny toy for those who can afford it. But shiny is good!
except that many people spend a lot more than 30 minutes a day in the car. and even if you dont on average; chances are you will take a road trip in it and spend 5+hours in a single sitting. also, if you buy a piece of crap you can easily spend more on fixing it, or buying another piece of crap in the near future. its not an absurd amount of money either.
there is a major difference though. if you dont also pay another seperate subscription fee for the internet and all that crap the iphone is useless. so its not just 400 anymore...
also how often do you really use your cell phone everyday? I use mine in place of a land line, and not counting calls to my girlfriend i doubt i spend 30 minutes on the thing per day. I'm not going to spend 400 on a phone that does crap I don't need it to
do because I have other things that do those things for me. Also the iphone isn't significantly better than many other phones out there now. You are trying to say that the iphone is a bentley to the blackberry curve being an acura and a razr (v3m) being a hyundai. the reality couldnt be further from the truth.
what do you spend so much time on your phone doing anyhow? 'browing the internet?' oh see I have this thing called a computer in the form of a laptop that I use when I'm at work or at home. So i cant check my email while i walk from my office to my car and while i drive home? this is a problem how? "i listen to music" oh see i just listen via my laptop/mp3 player at work and my car stereo when i drive and my home stereo when im at home.
most people Benefit from having a good cell phone more so than a good car? That part is interesting and I might agree; the problem is that you dont define what a good car or a good cell phone is. If you ask me a good cell phone is one that has reasonably good battery life, gets good reception, has plan condusive to my usage patterns, and allows me to use a headset (wired or bluetooth) with it. I don't care if it is color, plays music, makes toast, goes on the internet, plays games, etc. I care that it has good audio quality for phone calls. I would also argue that pretty much every phone out there meets this already. If I didn't have a digital camera, didnt have an mp3 player, and felt like I really needed to engage endlessly in text messages and browsing the net from my phone, sure its a good option. Other than that its just luxury crap. A better analogy would have been comparing someone spending 40K or more on a car. That's the person who should shutup.
Buying a 20K honda accord that will likely last 10+ years wihtout needing a major repair can be a decent investment for someone coming out of college (not that your car is or should be considered as such, its an asset by definition but more often its a liability).
and the difference between a 20K car and a 40k one can be a bit more pronounced. even a 14K car and a 20K car can be significant. you seem to toss those out as trivial and undetectable... i'm pretty sure you will notice the difference between a ford focus and toyota camry/honda accord, and if not today then when the ford dies in 4 years you'll notice the difference.
The other difference is lifetime, the 20K car is expected to live > 6 years, I'd expect it to live more than 8 maybe 10+
the iphone is definately not expected to live that long because a. there is no market for it when you are done with it in 2-4 years and b. because something else will come along and replace it.
I would instead redirect your argument at headphones. You'll pay 400 for iphone, who knows what for your ipod and your music and your stereo, but you wont pay even 50 bucks for a remotely non garbage pair of headphones? (realistically i would say 100$ but I'll start at 50, plus most people are going to want that same pair to be 'bad enough' to be able to use at the gym or running. Or mattresses, you only spend 8 hours a day or more lying on it. But your concern is over a cell phone.
my biggest gripe is "the difference
"Jazz isn't dead, it just smells funny" ~Frank Zappa
EdelFactor
I think it's an important distinction. Our specific language is becoming genericized all the time (q.v. "hacker", "brick", etc). There is no down-side to properly calling the thing "removable storage" or "portable drive" or whatever, as opposed to "hard disk", which is simply wrong. I am all for making the effort to gently help people use accurate and non-misleading terminology.
-b
myselfmusic
A newton isn't an iPod. Nor does it have 32GB of storage. It would be nice to have an SDK and the ability to do that, but so far no...
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
The ipod touch doesn't have physical volume buttons. For that matter, no ipods but the shuffle do.
You're right, I don't need all my music with me all the time. I do, however, WANT all my music with me all the time.
I waited for them to update the software so that it was really an iPhone without the phone, instead of crippled. They did that in January. And as luck would have it, my Palm T|X started acting up last week such that it was hard to use the handwriting recognition.
Bought a 16G Touch, got it Friday. I played with an iPhone and thought it was a great little device (but AT&T -- I think not) and that had me thinking about it, but having actually used the Touch now for four days I am just astounded by how good the interface is.
Some nits when using it as a PDA (primarily: it could use a louder speaker for alarms, and the calendar system's alarm tone is fixed and so soft it's almost impossible to hear if it's in your pocket), and I've crashed several of the applications here or there, but overall it kicks the Palm's butt, and unlike the Palm the WiFi is more than just a checkbox, it is really useful.
Two thumbs up. Stuff like this makes you wonder how come Microsoft couldn't do something even remotely as good despite six major revisions of Windows Mobile.
jim frost
jimf@frostbytes.com