Photos of Apple's 2007 holiday iPod lineup

[AppleInsider]

Apple Inc. during a press event on Wednesday introduced four new lines of iPods, including the new widescreen iPod touch, iPod classic, and iPod nano "phatty." Photos of each model from Apple's post-event reception follow.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[buddha]

awsome, I'm not sure how I feel about the overall look of the iPod classic, usually the "sleekness" is taken up a notch and makes the last version look antiquated but this one doesn't seem to do that. nevertheless the storage increases and interface modifications are amazing.

[teedoff087]

WHY WHY WHY on Earth did they go with shiny aluminum on the back of the new Touch?

[thomasfxlt]

I think the classic fits a niche of user that want portable storage/media player. The iPhone and I'll the bet the Touch as well, does not allow for disk mounting.

I think it's an interesting option and I'm glad they've continued it. I've really enjoyed my original iPod with Video.

[floribus]

I wonder if, Apple were to release a 3G iphone..... Would it be
available to other carriers like Verizon that already have superor 3g
capabilty? Since IT IS a different phone model anyways, the Apple/
AT&T exclusive contract wouldn't apply.

[amac4me]

The nano looks really cool. I like the red color.

[jasonfj]

I'm sad there's no more white on any of the iPods. I still think pure white looks better than the crappy 60's SciFi silver. Black is the only colour I like now, and the Touch looks nice - in fact, it's what the iPhone SHOULD look like, without the tacky, glitzy silver bezel.

[trevorlsciact]

I really like how the classic iPod looks, very understated, and almost zen (and I don't mean the fugly MP3 players)

[Bageljoey]

Originally Posted by jasonfj

I'm sad there's no more white on any of the iPods. I still think pure white looks better than the crappy 60's SciFi silver. Black is the only colour I like now, and the Touch looks nice - in fact, it's what the iPhone SHOULD look like, without the tacky, glitzy silver bezel.

Yeah, the Touch looks good. But I am surprised at how not bad the Phatty looks. In the leaked "flower" image from last week it looked terrible, I thought, but in hand it appeared reasonable IMO. If someone gave me one, I would keep it.

Though I would prefer a Touch.

And a Classic might be nice to have too...

[kdllb]

I was really looking forward to the new ipod touch but now im not going to buy it because the biggest only has 16GB. I think that if apple makes a bigger one, not only me but many other people would buy it.

[buddha]

Originally Posted by kdllb

I was really looking forward to the new ipod touch but now im not going to buy it because the biggest only has 16GB. I think that if apple makes a bigger one, not only me but many other people would buy it.

The reason is because the touch using flash memory (which is logical), everyone expected it and for there to be a bigger model (it would have to be 32GB) it would cost quite a bit more. Flash memory limits are increasing while the prices are dropping, I can guarantee steady capacity increases in the iPod touches memory over the next year.

[pazimzadeh]

Originally Posted by buddha

The reason is because the touch using flash memory (which is logical), everyone expected it and for there to be a bigger model (it would have to be 32GB) it would cost quite a bit more. Flash memory limits are increasing while the prices are dropping, I can guarantee steady capacity increases in the iPod touches memory over the next year.

Exactly, but also Apple can't make the Touch have a hard drive and] have all those cool animations and 3D things in it because hard drives are WAY slower than flash memory. Have you noticed how the old video iPod seems to lag if you scroll down a list too fast? My nano never lags, because nanos have flash memory.

What would be cool however is if they used some of those half flash, half hard disk drives so we could have nice screen effects and lots of storage...

[ifiredmyboss.com]

Does the new Phat Nano still work with the Nike stuff?

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by pazimzadeh

Exactly, but also Apple can't make the Touch have a hard drive and] have all those cool animations and 3D things in it because hard drives are WAY slower than flash memory. Have you noticed how the old video iPod seems to lag if you scroll down a list too fast? My nano never lags, because nanos have flash memory.

I'm sure that the indexing could be stored in a small amount of flash or RAM. There is probably potential for optimizations without needing to resort to all flash or a hybrid system with a lot of flash.

Apple may be reusing a lot of existing iPhone part designs with the Touch, though the relocated antenna suggests otherwise. The same is probably true with the iPod too, it's probably just a tweaked design.

[addabox]

Damn, I like the look of the new metal surfaces in those shots. Much, much better than shiny plastic.

I agree that the Classic looks sort of zen-- like a distillation of all the iPods that came before it, and kind of effortless. Maybe it's those rounded edges and matte finish, just really works for me.

And yeah, the Nano looks tons better than I would have thought, although..... how big is that thing? Looks to be twice the width of the old one, and at least as tall.

Anyway, I hope that's a good representation of the shade of green Apple's using, because I may have to pick me up one of them ones.

[Adjei]

Originally Posted by jasonfj

I'm sad there's no more white on any of the iPods. I still think pure white looks better than the crappy 60's SciFi silver. Black is the only colour I like now, and the Touch looks nice - in fact, it's what the iPhone SHOULD look like, without the tacky, glitzy silver bezel.

I think Apple won't be using any product that is white anymore, almost all the products that were previously white are being changed, only thing left is the mouse and airport extreme....

[F1Turbo]

Originally Posted by ifiredmyboss.com

Does the new Phat Nano still work with the Nike stuff?

Yes, Steve mentioned that in his pitch, up now at apple.com.

[PorpoiseMuffins]

[Delete]

[PorpoiseMuffins]

And yeah, the Nano looks tons better than I would have thought, although..... how big is that thing? Looks to be twice the width of the old one, and at least as tall

Nope, it's definitely not as tall (I did a photo comparison using the click wheel as a size reference). It's a bit larger overall because of the width, but not by a whole lot.

[the cool gut]

Originally Posted by teedoff087

WHY WHY WHY on Earth did they go with shiny aluminum on the back of the new Touch?

Because it shows the scratches and so a year or two from now, people will feel compelled to upgrade? They sure new better than try to pull that shit with the iPhone.

[alek_2]

Enough said. See you guys in the Apple store. I'll be the one shelling out for both fatty and touch; Eh...
It really sucks to be an early adopter (fishing expensive habbit) but these ipod models are just adorable...

[onceuponamac]

So – if the group that paid $499 or $599 is really upset – why not act together to show apple our frustration. Assuming we had the discipline – we could not purchase any new apple products for 12 – 18 months. Presumably, the 300,000 or so of us that acquired iPhones and aren’t within the window to obtain a refund are mostly early adopters – I’m the owner of a variety of mac products including a g5 iMac, intel core duo imac, core2duo 17” macbook pro, many airport expresses, several airport extremes, a mac mini, each generation of ipod (including a nano and a shuffle), several apple TV’s and, of course, an iphone. If we exercise our power as a group – we might get more respect from Apple. Think about it this way – there must be a lawyer among us – shouldn’t there be a legal argument under a construct of bad faith that apple and ATT violated their commitments and promises to us by not introducing promised upgrades (based on public statements by Apple and ATT to be distributed shortly after the introduction of the iPhone) – hence, allowing us to void our contracts with ATT with no further obligation for a contract breakage fee? Apple has demonstrated by it’s price decrease today that the period to meet commitments is something less than 3 months – it hasn’t provided any meaningful upgrades that don’t require a separate purchase (new iLife). Probably a smart lawyer among us could develop a legal basis for canceling our contracts with ATT even without Apple and ATT’s failure to meet their promises of service and device upgrades, given we paid in full for our devices and received no other meaningful consideration from ATT in exchange for entering into our contracts. If 300,000 (or even 170,000 of us) cancel our ATT contracts and acquire the hack to use the devices on other networks – we would demonstrate the organized power of the consumer and gain some attention given the lost revenue to ATT and Apple would be a multiple of the contract commitments that they failed to meet their commitments on. Of course, our nature as early adopters, suggests the discipline to punish Apple for a year or more is difficult – but as a group we have substantial purchasing power – simply aggregate our ATT contract commitments for two years times some number between 170k and 300k. My own view (which is that of a layman, but close follower of Apple’s product developments) is that Apple has over diversified it’s line up of ipods – I doubt the hard disk ipod will garner much in new sales – the iTouch may sell – but not if they introduce a 3G iPhone in the next 60 days (which is of course what all of us would not be able to resist). My own experience is that I use the extended features of the iPhone when I’m within distance of a wifi connection but don’t use them on the GSM network because it’s painfully slow – I’ll be much more upfront about this with other potential consumers given Apple’s act of bad faith today

[CAM]

I didn't think I would like it, but this new Nano is surprisingly attractive!

I love the size and simplicity of it and I bet it will feel quite nice in the hand.

I imagine that hi-res display is going to be mighty sweet in person.

These will make really sweet gifts.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by onceuponamac

So – if the group that paid $499 or $599 is really upset – why not act together to show apple our frustration. (ship)

It's not a good idea to cross post like that. This post belonged in the other thread, but not here.

Breaking a long post into paragraph is a good idea.

[smack416]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

It's not a good idea to cross post like that. This post belonged in the other thread, but not here.

Breaking a long post into paragraph is a good idea.

Having something to say that holds water would also be nice.

I get being pissed. But threatening legal action because a technology product has a price reduction, now that's just silly. (I know there was a lot of other blathering in there about promising this and that, but it's all pretty much hogwash).

[onceuponamac]

Originally Posted by smack416

Having something to say that holds water would also be nice.

I get being pissed. But threatening legal action because a technology product has a price reduction, now that's just silly. (I know there was a lot of other blathering in there about promising this and that, but it's all pretty much hogwash).

I'll keep my posts on iphone pricing to the other thread - but I do believe consumers have ultimate power. For this thread - I believe that Apple has hopelessly confused their product line up which is so non-SJ - that sort of reckless hubris doesn't suggest good news to me (note I'm only refering to myself) in terms of Apple's near term stock performance - particularly in light of the crunch the credit markets will extract on non-business consumers.

[onceuponamac]

Originally Posted by smack416

Having something to say that holds water would also be nice.

I get being pissed. But threatening legal action because a technology product has a price reduction, now that's just silly. (I know there was a lot of other blathering in there about promising this and that, but it's all pretty much hogwash).

There was no threat of legal action - just some thought about causes of action - I'm very doubtful that they're hogwash - but I understand this is the wrong thread for these opinions... : )

[xms]

I'm a bit disappointed myself by the new nano but only because of the storage, I was expecting to see at least a 16gb model On the looks department it's better than I thought after seeing the first leaked images

[ecking]

Damn all the models are nice, this is the perfect ipod combo imo.

[palegolas]

Originally Posted by kdllb

I was really looking forward to the new ipod touch but now im not going to buy it because the biggest only has 16GB. I think that if apple makes a bigger one, not only me but many other people would buy it.

I agree.. A top model with 32 GB would have caught me, even though it still has got no e-mail or notes apps. But then there would be no room for upgrading it next spring. However, when Apple (I suppose sometime before xmas) shows us how we can buy stuff to fill up all the black void on the middle of the iPod touch and iPhone, that's when many 16GB hesitants won't be able to hold back anymore.

[Bergermeister]

Originally Posted by ecking

Damn all the models are nice, this is the perfect ipod combo imo.

I completely agree.

My order has been placed with Apple for one nano and one Touch. For the nano I wanted black so no choice on size. For the touch, I decided bigger is better for the long term (I feel they will add functionality to it).

The iMac will have to wait until spring...

[CanadianDude]

Well, while I (like many others) would have liked a higher capacity iTouch, I am very pleased with the announcements and the available choices. Although I see can't get used to the new look of the nano.

I pulled the trigger on a 16gb iTouch yesterday after the announcement and have an shipping arrival date of October 3rd. Can't wait! The way I see it, I can always give it to wifey once they release a 3g (and maybe higher capacity iPhone) here in Sweden but since that is going to be a long time coming, the iTouch is a good fill-in until then.

Sure, 16gb won't cover my entire 500gb of music or my 2Tb of movies but I can be very selective as to what goes onto the iTouch so the lower capacity is fine (even though actual capacity will be lower than 16gb when formatted and minus OSX etc...).

I also appreciate that it looks like the iTouch does not have the recessed earphone port like on the iPhone.

[johnmcboston]

Originally Posted by teedoff087

WHY WHY WHY on Earth did they go with shiny aluminum on the back of the new Touch?

s/Touch/<any ipod>/w

:-)

[Joseph_xxl]

FINALLY, the ipod touch. It looks great and the fact that it has wi fi is terrific.
The iphone with the very slowwww edge network and that AT+T contract was NEVER an option for me. Now there is a great alternative!
Even the phat boy slim nano looks cool because it is SO THIN.
It's off to the Apple store for us this weekend. Nano for the kids, Itouch for me
My wife just got a video ipod a few weeks ago. She's not as thrilled about the news

[PBG4 Dude]

The iPhone has WiFi as well.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by palegolas

I agree.. A top model with 32 GB would have caught me, even though it still has got no e-mail or notes apps. But then there would be no room for upgrading it next spring. However, when Apple (I suppose sometime before xmas) shows us how we can buy stuff to fill up all the black void on the middle of the iPod touch and iPhone, that's when many 16GB hesitants won't be able to hold back anymore.

My only concern is that I like to have my iTunes set to sync all music, which is about 45 gigs in my case. Our two iPod 60 Gigs obviously suck it all in and this set up is a no brainer. Now if I buy a new Touch I will have to switch that off and go to a manual system or make loads of Playlists I assume. I am trying to think of a slick work around but I can't see one ... or is there already a solution in iTunes I am unaware of?

This went under my radar yesterday! Good news ...

"Apple has also added component video output to the iPods announced today via a component video cable. Apple states that component video output is currently supported with the iPod Nano (3G) and iPod classic (6G) at 480p or 576p, and the iPod Touch at 480i or 576i resolution." from: Mac Rumors web site.

[meelash]

I don't know about the rest of you, but my first reaction to the Apple event yesterday was: Wow! Does anyone remember a previous event with this many releases? The entire lineup refreshed (granted, the Shuffle was just new colors), new enclosures for nano and classic, brand new interfaces for nano and classic, insanely large capacities on classic, and insanely long battery time. Then a completely brand new product in the lineup. A new music store/shopping paradigm, and, just as the icing on the cake, ringtones. All in a space of an hour and a quarter.

It's amazing that in spite of expectations being insanely high (I kept sighing every time I saw an article predicting 3 or 4 new things coming out), Apple actually delivered, and there's not even any of the "Damn it, Apple where is <insert product here>" going on.

The amount of technological innovation going on at Apple these days is nothing short of mind-boggling! I don't think there's anything comparable anywhere else. I just hope they can keep it up.




On to the important stuff: looks like I'll be eBaying my 30GB 5th gen and buying an 80GB with the money. Fortunate, as I just went over 30GB and started having to selectively fill my iPod a few weeks back.

[meelash]

Originally Posted by digitalclips

My only concern is that I like to have my iTunes set to sync all music, which is about 45 gigs in my case. Our two iPod 60 Gigs obviously suck it all in and this set up is a no brainer. Now if I buy a new Touch I will have to switch that off and go to a manual system or make loads of Playlists I assume. I am trying to think of a slick work around but I can't see one ... or is there already a solution in iTunes I am unaware of?

This went under my radar yesterday! Good news ...

"Apple has also added component video output to the iPods announced today via a component video cable. Apple states that component video output is currently supported with the iPod Nano (3G) and iPod classic (6G) at 480p or 576p, and the iPod Touch at 480i or 576i resolution." from: Mac Rumors web site.

You can just make one playlist for the touch and treat it as a sub-library. Let the playlist auto-sync with it and drag things in and out from the main library as you please. That way your other iPods will stay on automatic sync with the whole library. Works quite nicely. You can also do all kinds of crazy things with Smart Playlists to automatically fill up the Touch with things you haven't listened to in a while, etc.

[Galex]

Originally Posted by digitalclips

My only concern is that I like to have my iTunes set to sync all music, which is about 45 gigs in my case. Our two iPod 60 Gigs obviously suck it all in and this set up is a no brainer. Now if I buy a new Touch I will have to switch that off and go to a manual system or make loads of Playlists I assume. I am trying to think of a slick work around but I can't see one ... or is there already a solution in iTunes I am unaware of?

You may want to try using multiple libraries in iTunes (one for each iPod), provided that you have a computer with enough hard disk space.

Edit: Maybe a playlist working as sub-library works equally well (as suggested by meelash). Haven't tried that one.

/Galex

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by meelash

You can just make one playlist for the touch and treat it as a sub-library. Let the playlist auto-sync with it and drag things in and out from the main library as you please. That way your other iPods will stay on automatic sync with the whole library. Works quite nicely. You can also do all kinds of crazy things with Smart Playlists to automatically fill up the Touch with things you haven't listened to in a while, etc.

Thanks for info .. So ... (he asks excitedly) are you saying each iPod 'remembers' it's settings such as 'sync all' or only 'sync selected playlists'? If so that is the bit of info I was missing between my ears lol I had assumed the settings were iTunes' based and applied to all iPods attached!