iPod Classic with Retina Display, Speaker, and Multitouch

No, it's not.

Because they're killing it off.

Why? There's zero point to that.

That's why the iPod touch EXISTS. The Classic will not be receiving NAND.

No, it won't have Bluetooth. It's being discontinued. That's why the iPod touch exists.

No, it won't have a speaker. It's being discontinued. That's why the iPod touch exists.

No, it WON'T HAVE A CAMERA. It's being discontinued. That's why the iPod touch exists.

No, it WON'T HAVE WI-FI. It's being discontinued. That's why the iPod touch exists.

So are sex change operations, electric vehicles, sugar glass, and cloth kites. These are all possible things. They all have different plausibilities, however. 

THERE IS WAY TOO MUCH PARAGRAPH SPACING IN THIS NEW FORMAT. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strat09 
You're really negative towards other people's ideas... 

I'm "negative" toward ideas that make no sense and have no basis in reality. The iPod classic is dying a slow death. Once NAND chips can be made large enough to surpass its capacity, it'll surely be discontinued.

It has stuck around far longer than I and many others ever expected, which shows that Apple either has a large back stock of them or that it's more popular than anticipated. I can understand that some people like the click-wheel, but it's dying one way or another. Everything else Apple makes is a testament to that, and it's just not logical to assume an updated feature set of any sort.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

 

I'm "negative" toward ideas that make no sense and have no basis in reality. The iPod classic is dying a slow death. Once NAND chips can be made large enough to surpass its capacity, it'll surely be discontinued.

 

It has stuck around far longer than I and many others ever expected, which shows that Apple either has a large back stock of them or that it's more popular than anticipated. I can understand that some people like the click-wheel, but it's dying one way or another. Everything else Apple makes is a testament to that, and it's just not logical to assume an updated feature set of any sort.

You are a jerk!  Why are you a moderator?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Troll Finder 
You are a jerk!  Why are you a moderator?

On the contrary. I think I've been rather respectful, particularly now that I know he's not just a throwaway spam account!

I understand the appeal of the iPod classic, but I'm not going to pretend it's going to be around forever or that Apple cares anything about it beyond what they can sell of it as it is now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

 

No, it's not.

 

 

Because they're killing it off.

 

 

Why? There's zero point to that.

 

 

That's why the iPod touch EXISTS. The Classic will not be receiving NAND.

 

No, it won't have Bluetooth. It's being discontinued. That's why the iPod touch exists.

 

No, it won't have a speaker. It's being discontinued. That's why the iPod touch exists.

 

No, it WON'T HAVE A CAMERA. It's being discontinued. That's why the iPod touch exists.

 

No, it WON'T HAVE WI-FI. It's being discontinued. That's why the iPod touch exists.

 

So are sex change operations, electric vehicles, sugar glass, and cloth kites. These are all possible things. They all have different plausibilities, however. 

 

THERE IS WAY TOO MUCH PARAGRAPH SPACING IN THIS NEW FORMAT. 

Here is a non-jerk way to reply to the OP:

Apple is moving away from the iPod classic and probably will not make an update. The iPod Touch will replacement the classic iPods.  Then you could back up your statement.  You just listed the OP comments and ranted.  It was not helpful response, just very pompous .   

I'm not lashing out at you just asking you to be more helpful to posters and less of jerk.  If you don't have something helpful to post just leave it alone!

Given that I can't even find a store with a decent case for my new Classic in stock, it's become pretty clear that it is dead. When I purchased it a couple of weeks ago the local Apple Store couldn't even find them in stock because they are so rarely asked for, and local stores I've visited looking for a case (Target, Micro Center, Fry's, Best Buy, Wal-Mart) said similar things. One interesting thing I found out is that the three "Classic" generations all have slightly different functionality. The original 80 and thick 160 had no support for Genius, the 120 supports genius playlists, and the new 160 supports genius mixes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strat09 
If nand flash based chips ( which apple just bought a company to build them more) were to surpass ipod's iconic 160 gb capacity, they would not be discontinued... 

But why do you think this? The iPod classic remains on the market for two reasons: Some people still like the click-wheel, and some people have music libraries that large and want to carry them around at all times, for some reason. Those reasons are theirs, and I respect them even if I don't share them.

With the release of even a 128GB iPod touch, I would imagine the classic would fall by the wayside, left up to purchase until stock runs out. Apple's not very sentimental. The writing has been on the wall since the first year it didn't get updated. Now it has been more than three.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strat09 
3 years of no updates means it had reached it's potential... because technology was not cheap and hard disk drives were not getting any cheaper.

Despite larger capacity hard drives having existed for at least two years and brand new Apple-designed battery tech powering the rest of their lineup?

It could have been 240GB and had 70 hours of playback time in 2009, but all they did was bring back the 160GB drive they previously took away.

Tech doesn't ever 'reach its potential' unless it's on the verge of being replaced or discontinued. Spinning hard drive capacities top out at 5TB. After that we either have to find a new method for storing bits, add more platters (making the drives even taller), or just move fully to its successor, SSD storage.

Similarly, without a drastic change in the way chips are made, Skymont looks to be the quantum limit of architectures. Hopefully by that time, Intel will have had a breakthrough in quantum computing so that we don't have to start having larger, hotter, more power-sucking chips.

But that doesn't have anything to do with any Apple device specifically, much less the iPod classic. 

What you want is already on the market. It's called the iPod touch. Grids of icons don't work with click wheels. People aren't suddenly going to want to go retro.

Yes, they did that because 32nm chips were cheaper. But what does this have to do with the iPod classic? If Apple was going to have updated it, they would have three years ago, and two years ago, and one year ago. Also, I'm certain you mean 1.6x, but even that sounds like it's pushing it. Do you have a link for those numbers? I've heard the 32nm chip gave better battery life, but I hadn't seen anything as impressive as nearly twice as long.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strat09 
nand flash is faster than hdd, ssd is the replacement of hdd. nandflash is less power consuming than hdd and equally the same as ssd ( both are flash) because it doesn't have a spinning component like the hdd. 

Ah! You're saying the iPod classic will be getting NAND? Okay, so what's the point of that? That's why the iPod touch exists, and that's what I'm saying. Hang on, I'll get to it.

The means of interaction is what would be retro. It's silly to think people would want to use a click wheel to navigate a grid, and with what would you populate it? I suppose you could make 20 icons out of "Music, Artists, Songs, Podcasts, Playlists, TV, Movies, Photos, Settings, Games"… Ah, I guess just ten, then… Split the games up, I guess.

So ten years from now the iPod classic will be updated? This research facility isn't for one product, and I cannot imagine the iPod classic is even on their list, much less near the top.

To clarify, not the iPhone 4S, but the one coming out this October, right? We don't know anything about that. We don't know if they're using 28nm chips.

Well, then why'd they switch to it in their old-model iPad whose price they reduced?

Because this isn't happening. You saying it is happening won't make it happen. There's no reason for anyone to believe the iPod classic will get any sort of update, much less one that makes it into nothing more than an iPod touch without the touchscreen, which, by virtue of the design of the UI, would make it nigh unusable.

If we heard about a dwindling supply of 160GB 1.8" hard drives, what would that imply? I'd imagine the death of the iPod classic. If we heard about a moderately-sized order of 240GB 1.8" hard drives, I'd imagine talk about an update would resurface. Fact of the matter is, you want NAND, you go with the iPod touch. Apple employees aren't working overtime trying to put together an entirely new iPod classic interior, exterior, and software just so the people with enormous ALAC libraries can avoid learning how to work a touchscreen. Because that's what it boils down to. 128GB in the iPod touch makes the iPod classic seem pretty obsolete.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strat09 

nand flash is faster than hdd, ssd is the replacement of hdd. nandflash is less power consuming than hdd and equally the same as ssd ( both are flash) because it doesn't have a spinning component like the hdd. the ipod touch is 5 x 4.. it would not be retro. If they bought a new location a mile away from their infinite loop head quarters and leased it for 10 years it means work and research will be made to make this possible. 32 nm is not cheaper. It's bearly new to Apple. 28 nm chips from qualcomm are not cheap either but that's what they're using for the new iPhone. WHY ARE YOU ARGUING! JUST BE HAPPY A NEW IPOD IS BEING MADE!!! GOD.

iPod sales are falling off a cliff. Only in your perfect world of pink cotton candy trees and bubble gum bushes will there be a new iPod Classic. There MAY be a new iPod with a 7" touch screen, but nothing like you are imagining. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strat09 

nand flash is faster than hdd, ssd is the replacement of hdd. nandflash is less power consuming than hdd and equally the same as ssd ( both are flash) because it doesn't have a spinning component like the hdd. the ipod touch is 5 x 4.. it would not be retro. If they bought a new location a mile away from their infinite loop head quarters and leased it for 10 years it means work and research will be made to make this possible. 32 nm is not cheaper. It's bearly new to Apple. 28 nm chips from qualcomm are not cheap either but that's what they're using for the new iPhone. WHY ARE YOU ARGUING! JUST BE HAPPY A NEW IPOD IS BEING MADE!!! GOD.

Oh my GOD! There is no new iPod Classic, mate. I mean, there wouldn't be any point having a touchscreen iPod with a clickwheel, would it? And tell me, WOULD it make you happy to use a touchscreen AND a clickwheel? It would be ridiculous for one to use both at the same time, when the intuitive UI of the iPod Touch/Nano exists. And, it would be even more ridiculous for Apple to support the same venture. Tallest Skil's argument is completely valid, albeit a bit impatient, not rude (well, not TOO much); the iPod Classic is dying, if not already dead. 160 GB or not. It's sad, I know. RIP, the iconic clickwheel.

Personally I'd like to see a physically larger iPod Classic that houses a standard 2.5" HDD.  2 TB of Apple Lossless music :P  Of course Apple won't do that, because they're about thin, and consumers don't care about audio quality.