or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › iPod as trojan horse
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iPod as trojan horse

post #1 of 33
Thread Starter 
doesn't it bother you that the iPod is so cool, yet it's just an MP3 player? doesn't it seem to have too much UI work and design appeal to
limit it's life to decoding bad music? i liken my iPod like to my first Mac Plus, not my Rio. why? instinct alone tells me apple has a big future planned with the iPod smack dab in the middle.

the "REMOTE" diagnostic may not be for the minidisc-style headphone mounted remote control as everyone has guessed. who wants a remote when the device is so small and easy to use? "REMOTE" may mean remote control. and with that i present you the trojan horse and a can of worms.

why didn't the ipod ship with the "REMOTE"? or a cap for the firewire port? and why didn't they design it with a standard Firewire port so
cables would fit snugly? what are those three extra contacts for in the headphone jack? is it because something(s) is supposed to snap on?

i would pay $100 to transform my iPod into a universal remote. get TV guides from the net. create custom channel lineups and interfaces. i have an ir remote WATCH ($15 - china town) so i know they can afford to fit this in. this brings to mind that Apple UK press release snafu invoving an apple set top box a month ago.

i'd fork over $200 to be able to hook up a microphone to my iPod. is that what those extra three contacts are for? They'd certainly appeal to musicians and the dictation market.

i'd shell out $300 to upgrade it to the as-yet unannounced high-speed point-to-point beaming firewire (apple patent 'firewave' or IEEE1394b). beam data to my friends & play games. synch without wires. etc.

i'd be the first to dole over $400 to convert it into a phone. the UI is definately up to the task. synch addressbooks with mac.

And finally, I'd happily give apple $500 to make my iPod Bluetooth. check my iPod to see if I'm out of milk, and find out if my Segway has enough juice to make it to the store.

here is a reason why something HAS to snap on: those three extra contacts are just sitting there on 3 of the 4 sides, pointing up the ring. whatever plugs in there can't just plug in there,
the plug would twist and the contacts would break. the connector needs someting secured elsewhere.

so this is my prediction: the iPod isn't an mp3 player. the name iPod has nothing to do with music. they don't even make references to the term "mp3 player" in it's description, they only say "1000 songs in your pocket". the iPod is really a small and relatively fast computer with a simple interface and the ability to multitask (try changing the volume while fast forwarding through a song, or play breakout). this makes it a perfect canindate to be a 'life remote'. a personal phone, dictation, music, remote, and orginization device. the name iPod relates to this description better than it does to "1000 songs". and just like the 1984 Mac, this will shatter some worlds, so it's being snuck in like some other comperably priced hand held device. in true trojan horse fashion.
<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
post #2 of 33
Wow...An idea that actually makes sense!

No iDock bullsh!t. Face it people the iDock can't possibly happen, I was just ROTFLMAO the entire time i was reading any of those threads on how ludicrasly stupid they are.
On the other hand, this makes perfect sense. I put my vote in for this.
Dfn Eupfhoria: the joy of playing the 21st level of marathon.
Reply
Dfn Eupfhoria: the joy of playing the 21st level of marathon.
Reply
post #3 of 33
You have WAY to much money.

-Moazam
post #4 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by Eupfhoria:
<strong>Wow...An idea that actually makes sense!

No iDock bullsh!t. Face it people the iDock can't possibly happen, I was just ROTFLMAO the entire time i was reading any of those threads on how ludicrasly stupid they are.
On the other hand, this makes perfect sense. I put my vote in for this.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Actually, I can see BOTH happening. The iDock that I speak of is similar to a replacement for the entertainment center. If there was going to be an iDock, I think that is the most viable version of it.

As for this "Life Remote", I think that is cool. However I think that Apple has more than just a "Life Remote" for our little buddy. I think this is one step that we really need to watch.

Today is such a wonderful time to be a Mac-Head!!

-- Mike Eggleston
-- Mac Fanatic since 1984.
-- Proud Member of PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals
-- Wii #: 8913 3004 4519 2027

Reply

-- Mike Eggleston
-- Mac Fanatic since 1984.
-- Proud Member of PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals
-- Wii #: 8913 3004 4519 2027

Reply
post #5 of 33
According to a co-worker (not verified myself), the iPod actually has three CPUs: two strongarms and one special DSP. The DSP is said to be the only processor actually decoding the MP3s. And it's clear that the microphone port was meant to be more than a microphone. It seems very obvious that the iPod is meant to be more than an MP3 player. Perhaps the iPod is the other component to the digital hub strategy...
PPC4EVER
Reply
PPC4EVER
Reply
post #6 of 33
[quote] i'd fork over $200 to be able to hook up a microphone to my iPod <hr></blockquote>

:confused:

You sound like a trust-fund brat.
post #7 of 33
[quote] You sound like a trust-fund brat. <hr></blockquote>

You sound jealous.
post #8 of 33
Actually, $200 is a whole lot just to get a microphone.

Now:

If said microphone did a *great* job of taking dictation and ye olde iPodde could then email your stuff to the person you *told* it to as an .rtf file...

And also read yer email to you...

And sync your to-do list with your voice notes
- me

$me = ('Berber' + 'Carpet');
Reply
- me

$me = ('Berber' + 'Carpet');
Reply
post #9 of 33
Thread Starter 
[quote] You have WAY to much money. <hr></blockquote>

[quote]You sound like a trust-fund brat. <hr></blockquote>

YOU two are both losers. I was just making a point, $100, $200, $300, $400, $500, I'm trying to show you people how much apple is getting away with. No more need for a Phillips Pronto, Sony DAT, Nokia Phone or a memory deprived Palm Pilot. The prices I listed for those features are LESS than the prices each of those items alone. I'm not saying I'd be happy paying $1500 for a tricked out iPod, but I'm sure whatever add-on(s) apple has up it's sleave will be well worth it and kill competition they never had in the first place. Pixio and PortalPlayer already have technology in these markets! That ARM processor can already hack these tasks.

Way to be friendly to a first-time poster. The truth: I'm an out of work multimedia designer who got an iPod as an early Christmas gift from his dad. What, are you guys still in the anger phase of the post Sept. 11 tragedy?

Try looking at the bigger picture here.

As for the iDock, it seems plausible, but unecessary. The new FireWave and new Airport should be our digital hubs. What they need now to finish up the product line is something that sits in my living room and can receive the mp3s and movies from my computer and iPod, and maybe act as a digital network recorder.

[quote] I think that Apple has more than just a "Life Remote" for our little buddy <hr></blockquote>

What more could there be? really, i can't think of anything!
post #10 of 33
What are you guys talking about with this whole FireWave thing? I've never heard of it. Do you mean Gigawire? There are no Apple Patents or Trademarks listed as FireWave.
Therefore, we request that you cease and desist from displaying your signature on all web sites and servers under the moderators' control, including AppeInsider.
Reply
Therefore, we request that you cease and desist from displaying your signature on all web sites and servers under the moderators' control, including AppeInsider.
Reply
post #11 of 33
This is the first I've heard of Firewave. There were some earlier rumors about Firewireless, etc. Lunarguy, have you actually tracked down a patent?
When they said "Think Different", I ran with it.
Reply
When they said "Think Different", I ran with it.
Reply
post #12 of 33
I second the mothion. You hae way too much money. Send me an iPod for Christmas, I don't hav eany yet! And you obviously have a dozen, snob.
post #13 of 33
Snobs?

Who let the poor guy in?

[ 12-09-2001: Message edited by: murk ]</p>
When they said "Think Different", I ran with it.
Reply
When they said "Think Different", I ran with it.
Reply
post #14 of 33
Check this thing out: <a href="http://tess.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=k1qkd4.6.2" target="_blank">iPod trademark</a> :eek:
"It's not like Windows users don't have any power; I think they are happy with Windows, and that's an incredibly depressing thought." -Steve Jobs
Reply
"It's not like Windows users don't have any power; I think they are happy with Windows, and that's an incredibly depressing thought." -Steve Jobs
Reply
post #15 of 33
Hey, if you want to pay $200 to put a mic on an iPod, suit yourself. Some of us value our money a bit more, and that doesn't make us losers.

<a href="http://www.griffintechnology.com/audio/order.html" target="_blank">http://www.griffintechnology.com/audio/order.html</a>
post #16 of 33
You still sound like you have way to much money.

-Moazam

PS&gt; And no, I'm not jealous. I'm rollin on 20's..sheee1t..
post #17 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:
<strong>Hey, if you want to pay $200 to put a mic on an iPod, suit yourself. Some of us value our money a bit more, and that doesn't make us losers.</strong><hr></blockquote>



the prices are arbitrary . . .

on another note

[quote]Originally posted by lunarguy:
<strong>are you guys still in the anger phase of the post Sept. 11 tragedy?</strong><hr></blockquote>

what was that about? <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
post #18 of 33
[It's just awful when a decent topic gets bogged down with unecessary drama...]

Back on topic, many have long held that the name 'iPod' implied it's general functionality. I'm waiting for Rev. 2, because I think that it will have better features, and be better suited for future capabilities--whatever they may be.

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: gordy ]</p>
post #19 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by murk:
<strong>This is the first I've heard of Firewave. There were some earlier rumors about Firewireless, etc. Lunarguy, have you actually tracked down a patent?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Wireless Firewire has been done by both <a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/1999-09/0902-wirelessfirewire.html" target="_blank">Philips</a> and <a href="http://www.firewireworld.com/news/2000/01/20000127/necfirewirewireless.shtml" target="_blank">NEC</a>. And if you head over to the IEEE 1394 Trade Organization's site, you can find <a href="http://www.1394ta.org/Press/2001Press/december/12.3.a.htm" target="_blank">a proposal to send 1394 over 802.11 (Airport).</a>

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: Arty50 ]</p>
post #20 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by gordy:
<strong>...the name 'iPod' implied it's general functionality. I'm waiting for Rev. 2]</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think this is a good example of the general wisdom cautioning against buying rev A Apple products.

(course... i bought a Rev A iBook.. but then, i *love that little thing.)
- me

$me = ('Berber' + 'Carpet');
Reply
- me

$me = ('Berber' + 'Carpet');
Reply
post #21 of 33
The idea of a mac remote occurred to me too, I think it was last summer when the new iMac rumors were flying high. This isn't probably a new idea and I'm sure this has been all over the boards for years but hey, I'll give it a shot anyway

IMHO iPod is too pricey to be the ultimate mac remote. My vision (tm of the mac remote is instead something like this:
- cheap palm-like device with b/w screen
- bluetooth networking (or wlan if battery life is enough)
- charger/sync cradle a'la palm (or just directly attached to the mac itself like powerbook duo was)
- simple UI with no handwriting recognition or any actual keyboard, just touch sensitive LCD

User experience:
The UI and user experience I thought of was based on "modules" a bit like control strip on the go. These modules would be mostly one way from mac to the remote, displaying data that is provided to the modules from the network (soap/web services etc) or just from desktop programs (you've got mail!). The communication from the remote to the mac would be mainly by huge easy to click buttons on the touch sensitive screen, five buttons / module max to keep the operation simple and fast.

Typical use cases:
- watching tv or working away from mac, remote alerts when you have new mail, new message in ICQ etc
- providing information on ongoing processes, for example server status (load etc), rendering status (maya), network status to techies
- providing basic news, tv, stocks etc info (your general portal stuff) when you're away from your mac but within range of the bluetooth/wlan
- controlling mp3 player from your sofa (again, 5 buttons max)
- Entourage alerts for tasks, calendar etc
-

Price issues:
- keep the technology cheap, no high tech needed here
- battery life not an issue, remote won't leave the house anyway. 5 hours of operation away from mac would be more than enough.
- as the device doesn't actually compute anything but just displays stuff, processing power can be kept at minimum (cheap processors)
- Keep it simple

How to make it a success:
- provide simple API to developers for building modules to work with existing programs
- bundle with every mac or build special bundle packs at least to gain significant user base
- keep the remote metaphor clear, it's not a pda. That way the common public can also understand it's usefulness (and it makes great cheesy ads: "Honey, remember when we had no remote on our TV?")

At the time I thought of this, the biggest problem I thought of was that Jobs would never put a b/w screen on an Apple product, but well... seems like I was wrong on that one at least

If Apple doesn't do that, it's possible to assemble similar setup from old Handspring Visor with wlan adapter, just some code on the PalmOS end and server to OSX side. Authentication to recognize which device belongs to what mac, perl/python/applescript/whatever support to the server side, some hacking around and off we go... Well, it's a dream

Sumppi
post #22 of 33
I was expecting an anouncment on Dec 4 with schiller. Whe they announced the offline editting feature in Finalcut it came together even more.

I completely agree with Lunarguy. iPod has more features to come. I work in two locations. I have to carry most of my info back and forth between my machines. (not on a LAN).

The offline feature of Finalcut is making me seriously look at an iPod. I could move major projects around on an iPod.

Everyday the iPod is loking more like a portable computer. Soon I am just going to plug my iPod into whichever worksation I am on and boot from my iPod to whcihever OS I choose and run whichever software I want with my preferances and my files...and not worry about whoever was last on the machine.

But I don't think my vision is the only one possible for his device. I really hope Apple doesn't drop the ball on this one because it truly could become revolutionary as first sugested.

BTW back off on the dollar figure Lunar mentioned...He/she was just trying to make a point and I think it got lost on some who were looking for a fight and had little to contribute to his/her valuable post.
post #23 of 33
I think that everyone saying "the price is outragous!..etc." should take into account all the things that iPod offers compared to what it fails to offer(and could probably be added in later revisions and/or expansions that would be less than 20 dollars)
Tiny, quiet, great output, easy to use, 5 gig hd, FIREWIRE! just this alone makes it worth it, can store any file format..etc
it lacks a mic and a radio!(oh and a carrying case) well you could have a firewire based mic but that would be a bit expensive so if there was a large enough demand for a mic apple would probably make an updated version eventually, as for radio, I an see some people griped over this, but personally I hate radio, the only station worth listening to is KCRW cuz its commercial free and plays all my favorites and then some.
And a carrying case would be EASY to make for a price under 20 dollars probably, all in all compared to other Hd based mp3 players which are either more expensive or a little less expensive it is BY far the best value and best player.
iDock is feasible, It would be a little to intruding on iMacs territory however, methinks the next iMac will come complete with like 4 USB ports 2 firewire and 2 gigawire(if this is next firewire) along with all the standards and perhaps it would have 1/8th and 1/4 inputs as well

I wish they sold an iMac with MIDI
orange you just glad?
Reply
orange you just glad?
Reply
post #24 of 33
The price is right. Just too mcuh.

The HD costs $350, let;s ay it costs Apple $300 in bulk. Add firewire. I have no idea how much this scosts. Ask Piso to sell theeir OS. Build Ittunes 2 functionality right n .
Apple is scraping their margins here.
post #25 of 33
perhaps multimedia designers should learn about hardware design and implementation, and business cases for product development before delving into such craziness... I realise you've got time on your hands, but... WOW
[quote]
why didn't the ipod ship with the "REMOTE"? or a cap for the firewire port? and why didn't they design it with a standard Firewire port so
cables would fit snugly? what are those three extra contacts for in the headphone jack? is it because something(s) is supposed to snap on?
<hr></blockquote>
interesting place to "snap" something onto. I highly doubt you could ever pull off a "springboard" style interface using 3 contacts on a headphone jack. And how many people really expand their visor with springboard modules? (I realize some of you do make use of this but certainly not all, not 50% of visor owners make use of the expansion possibilities - that's alot of development cost for limit return. Ever wonder why the springboard connector isn't built into the Edge or the Treo?) My company build a module -- it didn't sell. Sorry but your world of electronic wishes just isn't going to clip onto a headphone jack with 3 extra contacts. Sure someone COULD do it, but there is almost NO return on investment. AAPL isn't going to spend hundreds of thousands trying to earn nickles. They'll build one device that does its one job (or two) well and leave it at that.
[quote]
i would pay $100 to transform my iPod into a universal remote. get TV guides from the net. create custom channel lineups and interfaces. i have an ir remote WATCH ($15 - china town) so i know they can afford to fit this in. this brings to mind that Apple UK press release snafu invoving an apple set top box a month ago.
<hr></blockquote>
well the set top box affair was already debunked. The news agency got names mixed up and accidentally attached AAPL to it. Certainly YOU would pay $100 for a universal remote, but how many others would? Not every iPod owner is going to rush out and expand his/her iPod just because they can. Watches are more appropriate - everyone can wear one. But a niche expansion device for a niche device just isn't going to sell enough. No business case.
[quote]
i'd fork over $200 to be able to hook up a microphone to my iPod. is that what those extra three contacts are for? They'd certainly appeal to musicians and the dictation market.
<hr></blockquote>
This actually makes sense. Nothing like building a product and selling it with a reduced feature set. Then, when sales start to drop a "new" version can come out with the "new" feature. Case in point, the clamshell iBook. The first few Rev's didn't have Firewire, but there was room for it on the motherboard. Then, when the iBook was getting long in the tooth, suddenly a new model (same case design) came out with Firewire. I rather doubt that you will do on the fly voice recognition (I'm not sure if you're suggesting this).

Oh, and the three extra contacts aren't necessary for microphone implementation. A standard single pole headphone jack can have an integrated microphone in the earpiece. Look at jabra.com for examples.
[quote]
i'd shell out $300 to upgrade it to the as-yet unannounced high-speed point-to-point beaming firewire (apple patent 'firewave' or IEEE1394b). beam data to my friends & play games. synch without wires. etc.
<hr></blockquote>
I'm interested to know how three contacts on the headphone jack tie into "firewave" - creative name by the way. Oh and you're going to play 'breakout" on a iPod with your friend wirelessly? Pretty expensive isn't it - what's wrong with a GameBoy Advance. Perhaps this idea would be better directed towards a game boy forum.

Sync without wires... I just don't understand how moving 1000 songs in 15 minutes (more or less one time only) with intermediate 1 minute or less additions to the library is such a hassle that people would spend another $300 just to avoid it. The price of the iPod is already keeping people from purchasing it, people who don't WANT wireless syncing. Can you imagine how much of a "cube" the iPod would be if it cost another $300??? Sorry, just doesn't cut it. Perhaps this beaming technology you speak of is called Laser or Microwave?

[quote]
i'd be the first to dole over $400 to convert it into a phone. the UI is definately up to the task. synch addressbooks with mac.
<hr></blockquote>
How much do cell phones cost? How many cell phones can I buy for $400? How am I going to dial random numbers (non-address book) with the iPod. It doesn't have a touch sensitive screen, and I don't think the scroll wheel is the best way of picking numbers. Notice how rotary phones just don't sell well anymore? You definitely seem to be an advocate of the "digital convergence." As well doesnt' come across as very cost effective. I don't even think that an integrated datebook/addressbook is appropriate for the iPod as it is currently designed. How do you enter new contacts on the road?

Asteroids on an iPod, sure. OfflineRT FCP projects on an iPod, perhaps. But even the generic name of "pod" doesn't automatically imply "I was designed to do EVERYTHING you ever imagined an electronic device could do." Somebody would want an automatic car starter add-on, and someone else would want a gprs modem add on. No way can apple satisfy every niche with separate products. Nor can they build it ALL in and market it at a reasonable price. Be glad that it holds tons of mp3's, can also hold files and system folders, and is the size it is.

[quote]
And finally, I'd happily give apple $500 to make my iPod Bluetooth. check my iPod to see if I'm out of milk, and find out if my Segway has enough juice to make it to the store.
<hr></blockquote>
how would bluetooth help you see if your iPod is out of juice? Turning it on is too hard? or you would like for your iPod to use its batteries (and decrease their charge) and monitor its own battery level, notifying your bluetooth enabled desktop machine that it's running out of juice?

And i never knew MY segway was bluetooth enabled...

And how on earth is my iPod going to know how far my segway is from the grocery store? Or if the wind is blowing and is going to cause my Segway to use more juice than expected.

Wow, you certainly have a creative mind. Perhaps more buzzword technologies will ratify your ideas.

&lt;/sarcasm&gt;

-- creative ideas, just not realistic
(oh, and I'm betting the contacts are for a remote)

[ 12-11-2001: Message edited by: Chicken Tastes Good ]</p>
the empty can rattles the loudest
Reply
the empty can rattles the loudest
Reply
post #26 of 33
Thread Starter 
That was my favorite reply Chicken! Finally, someone who completely misunderstands me.

[quote]
interesting place to "snap" something onto. I highly doubt you could ever pull off a "springboard" style interface using 3 contacts on a headphone jack.
<hr></blockquote>

When I say snap on, I don't mean just on the headphone jack, with it's limited pinnage. My wild and crazy creativity sees something snapping onto the Firewire port and headphone jack, covering (and reassigning) the hold switch (adding slightly less than 1 inch to the height).

[quote]
Oh, and the three extra contacts aren't necessary for microphone implementation. A standard single pole headphone jack can have an integrated microphone in the earpiece. Look at jabra.com for examples.
<hr></blockquote>

What you are talking about is a shared ground situation, works fine for mono cell phone-quality jabra crap. I want stereo, that means at least three pins for the headphones and three for the (stereo) microphone(s). It is possible that the headphone jack is software switchable, allowing audio in, leaving the other three pins still unaccounted for, but I doubt they'd do it that way.

[quote]
Sync without wires... I just don't understand how moving 1000 songs in 15 minutes (more or less one time only) with intermediate 1 minute or less additions to the library is such a hassle that people would spend another $300 just to avoid it. The price of the iPod is already keeping people from purchasing it, people who don't WANT wireless syncing. Can you imagine how much of a "cube" the iPod would be if it cost another $300??? Sorry, just doesn't cut it. Perhaps this beaming technology you speak of is called Laser or Microwave?
<hr></blockquote>

I thought I already explained my pricing scheme. You seem to forget that many people are not just using their iPods for mp3s. Myself included.

[quote]
I'm interested to know how three contacts on the headphone jack tie into "firewave" - creative name by the way. Oh and you're going to play 'breakout" on a iPod with your friend wirelessly? Pretty expensive isn't it - what's wrong with a GameBoy Advance. Perhaps this idea would be better directed towards a game boy forum.
<hr></blockquote>

I wouldn't buy a wireless add-on for games, and I wouldn't expect Apple to market it as such. But if I had one, why not game with it?

[quote]
How much do cell phones cost? How many cell phones can I buy for $400? How am I going to dial random numbers (non-address book) with the iPod. It doesn't have a touch sensitive screen, and I don't think the scroll wheel is the best way of picking numbers. Notice how rotary phones just don't sell well anymore? You definitely seem to be an advocate of the "digital convergence." As well doesnt' come across as very cost effective. I don't even think that an integrated datebook/addressbook is appropriate for the iPod as it is currently designed. How do you enter new contacts on the road?
<hr></blockquote>

There are plenty of cell phones that sell for over $400, but again, you're bringing up the money thing. Of course it wouldn't be $400. I think an addressbook is completely appropriate, especially if it can call the numbers. I'd happily put one in as it is - it wouldn't take up much space. I don't dial many random numbers with my cell phone, and I'd be happy to replace the dialpad with that scroll wheel. If you're a hardcore on-the-road business guy, then you have your powerbook with you anyway, and you would enter contacts in as you would mp3s. (PS I bought a rotary phone on Ebay recently, the classic Ericophone in flesh-tone beige )

[quote]
Asteroids on an iPod, sure. OfflineRT FCP projects on an iPod, perhaps. But even the generic name of "pod" doesn't automatically imply "I was designed to do EVERYTHING you ever imagined an electronic device could do." Somebody would want an automatic car starter add-on, and someone else would want a gprs modem add on. No way can apple satisfy every niche with separate products. Nor can they build it ALL in and market it at a reasonable price. Be glad that it holds tons of mp3's, can also hold files and system folders, and is the size it is.
<hr></blockquote>

I very glad. It already makes my life easier and gives it a good soundtrack. And the name Pod definately means it can do anything I imagine! It is sure to have an analog modeling synth engine in the next software update. I'm only talking about a few non-niche markets (dictation, telecom, wireless computing and home entertainment/automation).
What's a gprs modem?

[quote]
how would bluetooth help you see if your iPod is out of juice? Turning it on is too hard? or you would like for your iPod to use its batteries (and decrease their charge) and monitor its own battery level, notifying your bluetooth enabled desktop machine that it's running out of juice?
<hr></blockquote>

No, my iPod (in my hand) would tell me if my Segway (in the garage) was low on juice. I never said anything about the iPod's juice.

[quote]
And i never knew MY segway was bluetooth enabled...
<hr></blockquote>

Well, it is.

[quote]
And how on earth is my iPod going to know how far my segway is from the grocery store? Or if the wind is blowing and is going to cause my Segway to use more juice than expected.
<hr></blockquote>

That computing will be up to you.

[quote]
Wow, you certainly have a creative mind. Perhaps more buzzword technologies will ratify your ideas.
<hr></blockquote>

Yeah, I'm all about the buzzwords: 'Phone" "Voice Recorder" "Remote Control" '"Wireless"

Speaking of buzzwords, you mentioned digital convergence. This is for real, like it or not. We are about to see many "all in one" handhelds, and Apple might have just snuck there's in.

Thank you for your constructive follow-up. Do you have an iPod? Maybe you'd like my ideas better if you did.
post #27 of 33
I would definitely like to have all that stuff attached to me
Over a 1,000 songs in your pocket.
Reply
Over a 1,000 songs in your pocket.
Reply
post #28 of 33
the iPod will be one of the CPUs (or 3 of the CPUs) from the "tablet"

a 320x240 LCD with handwriting recognition, running macos X, with airport, modem, ethernet, usb and firewire, av in/out, digital audio out too.

slot load DVD-Rom

there is a slot to connect your iPod so your tablet can use the CPUs and the harddrive and the sound input/output

the tablet will be the center of lots of other devices.

it will have full quicktime capabilities, so you can use your TV to watch movies and everything else..

your desktop mac will have the HD storage that you will use , from the built in airport

there should be a iApp also that will link iMovies, iTunes and iDVD, that also controls the tablet remotely and syncs everything

this will sell a lot in japan
post #29 of 33
A powerfull but simple feature to add to the trojan horse :
Apple has already all the piece of the puzzle they need: network-booting of the OS, separate folder for every users related stuff (include. Preferences, ), network search of users,
Imagine, you have OS-X on your internal HD (if you wish or if you have one) or in education or business (designer studios, consultants, ) on a server and booted from that OS. Actually the Users identification panel makes a network wide research for users. Why cant it make a research on an iPod connected via Firewire to your Mac ? Why ? Hum, it certainly can. And thats the big Thing : you can sale very-low Network-Mac without HD and sales iPod-like devices for every user (the user has a MP3-player bonus ) that they can plug into the new Macs at home, school, business, and always with there personal environment. Great isnt it. You dont need to charge your iPod with the entire OS, just your user-folder. Mine is actually 7GB big on my PowerBook G4, so is the iPod a little small, but wait a bit and the HD-size on it will grow.
Thats maybe a little Paradise-like vision : more Mac in the world, so more this concept is viable, HD-speed issue, but we have all dreams Your digital live to go !
It actually can be done : on my cube -my server- I actually host my Users folder on a other partition as the OS (with a symbolic link), so I think I can place a user folder on my iPod (if I had one rolleyes: )
post #30 of 33
I've got to give you credit, you're not half as crazeee :&gt; as I originally concluded. Nice response. I have a tendancy to bottle things up and then BOOM let the all out on some unsuspecting soul. I'm rather bothered by the rampant, idle, wasteful, non-productive speculation on these boards. Sometimes people truly have good ideas that they have thought through, but mostly it seems like some utopian expectation of apple to do every thing for the "revolutionary" $299 mark. The only thing these people seem to illustrate is that just cause AAPL builds it, not everyone will buy it. (the noise over the iPod and its price for example...-&gt; but I guess that was the macnn boards) (& revolutionary seems to be the up and coming word on these boards - ready to replace "confirmed" as most used word...)

I'm bothered that "these" people seem to have the idea that just because "they" dream it up, AAPL should build it. Sorry folks, but if even the greatest of IDEAS aren't marketable to LOTS AND LOTS of people (not just you) then NO ONE who has a decent business sense will build them. AAPL can't risk too many more cubes. Niche companies can build niche products in the hope that it will make them big. Big companies (in economies such as this) can't afford a high level of risk unless they are willing to potentially throw away TONS of money. Sometimes they will, but certainly not for every whim or "revolutionary" idea that some AI participant dreams up.

That said,
Good response - you actually have thought about this idea a bit more that I gave you credit. And no, I'm not an anti-digital-convergence guy, I'm just not a firm believer... I'll explain more later.

[quote]
When I say snap on, I don't mean just on the headphone jack, with it's limited pinnage. My wild and crazy creativity sees something snapping onto the Firewire port and headphone jack, covering (and reassigning) the hold switch (adding slightly less than 1 inch to the height).
<hr></blockquote>
Just to give you a hard time I'll say, "Which exact attachments are you expecting to use this FW/headphone attachment?" and, "Don't you think that if Apple expected to do something like this, they would have included a better interface", and, "Do you want Apple to do all this or a third party?"

I do agree that i would be very very cool to add any number of things to an ipod in a small and slick manner. As firewire is a peer-to-peer protocol this potentially could be done. Perhaps not as small as you would like, and well, there probably arent' ENOUGH people to buy the attachments to justify building them, but it certainly could be done and would be nice for a FEW if such items were built. A lot of my arguments are based on the idea of a Return on [development] Investment (that the company would make significant $$$ developing and marketing such items), and not just because they could be build or that someone would enjoy using the iPod for a large number of purposes. Again, cool ideas with no "business case" won't be built. Bluetooth toasters just arent' going to take off in the near future. I have a toaster - it works fine, why would I need bluetooth? Would it be cool? Yes. Would people buy it? Few...

[quote]What you are talking about is a shared ground situation, works fine for mono cell phone-quality jabra crap. I want stereo, that means at least three pins for the headphones and three for the (stereo) microphone(s). It is possible that the headphone jack is software switchable, allowing audio in, leaving the other three pins still unaccounted for, but I doubt they'd do it that way.<hr></blockquote>

Good call. Nailed me on that one. Touche. I do thing that no audio-in was a mistake. And I doubt its software switchable (though it COULD be). Perhaps, again, its like the first Gen iBooks without firewire. Perhaps in July the iPod will mysteriously be sold as "Now with Audio in!". Apple is good at that. They leave out features in the RevA so they can throw it in later and keep selling the ALMOST identical machine 8 months later for the same price. Although, my Rev A iMac did have IR and nothing after Rev C (B?) has ever had it - or ever will.

[quote]
I thought I already explained my pricing scheme. You seem to forget that many people are not just using their iPods for mp3s. Myself included.
<hr></blockquote>
Let me see if I understand your pricing scheme. $400 for the base iPod. All other items are "sold separately" for the prices you originally quoted? Fine, you have your pricing idea. I say that NO ONE (other than you and Joe and Phil and Derryl) will spend an additional $400 for JUST a cell phone add on. And I don't know where you live ( the land of expensive cell phones evidently...) but NO ONE buys a cell phone around here for more than $100. Most are sold (with service plan of course) for around $50. Tri-mode, WAP enabled phones. Again, I think that Handspring is an example of "add ons" marketing that failed. They've basically dropped the Springboard idea will all their newest products. Even the VisorPhone isn't more than $50.
[quote]
There are plenty of cell phones that sell for over $400, but again, you're bringing up the money thing. Of course it wouldn't be $400. I think an addressbook is completely appropriate, especially if it can call the numbers. I'd happily put one in as it is - it wouldn't take up much space. I don't dial many random numbers with my cell phone, and I'd be happy to replace the dialpad with that scroll wheel. If you're a hardcore on-the-road business guy, then you have your powerbook with you anyway, and you would enter contacts in as you would mp3s. (PS I bought a rotary phone on Ebay recently, the classic Ericophone in flesh-tone beige )
<hr></blockquote>
Cellular companies sell the phone at a loss. They make up for it via the service plan. AAPL isn't a cellular service provider, they can't subsidize the sales of their hardware to improve customer acceptance. So how would it NOT be $400??? I'd buy two iPods AND a cell phone before I'd buy an iPod and then spend $400 on a "cell phone" attachment. Heck, I'd buy 4 cell phones (at $50 each) and use the other $200 to pay the bill before I'd buy an attachment. But that's me, not you. Evidently you appreciate the iPod enought to forego the economy of purchasing common products (fully functional) and would spend your hard earned bucks for the beauty of an enhanced iPod.

Address book incorporated into the iPod - Sure. Software can take care of that -&gt; integrate with palm desktop or ??? Sure, good idea. Totally. Perhaps even software that could sync or dial your "cheap" cell phone using your address book. Totally applicable, rather universal...

Nice purchase on the rotary phone. I won't buy a cell phone unless I can get one that sounds exactly the same as a 70's rotary phone when it rings...

[quote]
I wouldn't buy a wireless add-on for games, and I wouldn't expect Apple to market it as such. But if I had one, why not game with it? <hr></blockquote>
So WHY would you want the wireless add on - just cause it's cool? AAPL should spend the R&D on adding wireless capabilites to their product on the off chance that someone will develop games for it? EVERY iPod user would have to make full use of the wireless capabilites before they would even consider building it in. And what on earth would EVERYONE use wireless for? Certainly they wouldn't replace the rather efficient, elegant Firewire implementation just to be "revolutionary" and be "wireless" [/buzzwords]

So tell me again, WHY? does it need to be wireless? Check your stock quotes on an iPod? Read your email (and respond- HAH!) on an iPod? Browse the company intranet and read PDF's and submit reports with an iPod from the park? Why???

I'm rather certain that EVERY individual who purchases an iPod listens to music on it. The same can't (couldn't) be said for other options.

[quote]
I [am] very glad. It already makes my life easier and gives it a good soundtrack. And the name Pod definately means it can do anything I imagine! It is sure to have an analog modeling synth engine in the next software update. I'm only talking about a few non-niche markets (dictation, telecom, wireless computing and home entertainment/automation).
What's a gprs modem?
<hr></blockquote>

Wow, we certainly don't agree on the usage of the word niche or Pod. Pod seems to say that it holds or stores things well. Like a pea pod hold/stores peas. Music, files, Addresses. Sure. Control your stereo (remote) or start your car or turn on the blender, no. Niche? Only know one person who semi-regularly uses dictation software. Analog modeling synth engine? to replicate a human voice? Yep, apple regularly updates the "speech" voices don't they? New voices for a new OS (OS X) right? Definitely everyone needs to have Victoria (high quality) or Ralph tell them the name of the next track or the time or how much space is left or to recite the last paragraph I dicatated to it or to read me "1984" as I wait for my flight to leave? I'm glad you're sure that it will be in the next software rev - its universally useful isn't it. [/sarcasm] ('tis a cool idea though - just ain't gonna happen any time soon...)
wireless computing??? Well 802.11 is the most popular wireless technology associated with computing and that's neither ubiquitous nor wireless computing. Just wireless networking... Ricochet - there you're getting closer to wireless computing. Hopefully Aerie networks can make something of Metricom's assets. GPRS is standard for wireless data transfer on updated GSM networks (cellular). CDMA 1xRTT, 1xEVDO and 1xEVDV are data protocols for digital CDMA networks. GPRS and 1xRTT are just getting rolled out. Neither will match Ricochet for transfer rates. Neither is ubiquitous nor even on the verge of consumer acceptance. Definite niche market stuff... Home entertainment/automation? The automation of home entertainment? Sure everyone has a TV & VCR & stereo. Some have DVD players. I don't know anyone (other than Andy Ihnako (sp?) ) who uses X11 style automation in their home... Remote controls yes - but 99% of people I know have 3 remotes they use for 3 different home entertainment components. The one person I know who did buy a universal remote had either really old stuff or stuff newer than the remote that wouldn't work with it. I can make my HP calculator control all sorts of home entertainment stuff. Do I use it? Never. The standard remote does its job well. Niche Niche niche!

[quote]
No, my iPod (in my hand) would tell me if my Segway (in the garage) was low on juice. I never said anything about the iPod's juice.
<hr></blockquote>

A lack of clarity (omission) in your original does not make my statement accusatory or wrong. (just so you know). Thanks for clarifying the idea. Where in the segway specs does it say that it is bluetooth enabled? And what REALLY is bluetooth range? Lets hope my office isn't higher than the 3rd floor and that I dont' park my segway in sub basement parking level 7.

[quote]
quote:
--------------------------------------------------

And how on earth is my iPod going to know how far my segway is from the grocery store? Or if the wind is blowing and is going to cause my Segway to use more juice than expected.

--------------------------------------------------

That computing will be up to you.

<hr></blockquote>
Good, I'm sure glad that bluetooth can help me narrow my computing to a reasonable (windspeed/friction) level.

[quote]
Speaking of buzzwords, you mentioned digital convergence. This is for real, like it or not. We are about to see many "all in one" handhelds, and Apple might have just snuck there's in.
<hr></blockquote>

"This is real, like it or not." Bwa Haa Haa!!!
Hmmm. Hmmm. Is that to say that I sound "anti-technology"? I spend far too time "keeping up" with this stuff to hate it. Digital convergence is a thread all its own. I'm not a believer. And I'll argue you to the death on that one until you prove me wrong Certainly some things are converging - so I am a hippocrite. But for clarity I would retort to your statement of "This is for real, like it or not" by saying that there is NO (please prove me wrong) product that embodies the Digital Convergence as it is intended to be. Handspring treo and all the other PDA cell phones are totally in their infancy. Many Cell phones, "Now with PDA capabilities" aren't used for anything more than as a phone with a listing of commonly used numbers. They're lemons with wacky, unconsistant, frustrating UI's. Do ALL that stuff with that LITTLE screen? Hand held PC's are all the rage, right? You know, the old ones that used Windows CE 2.0 and are the size of a philly cheese steak sandwich? Here's hoping the Treo takes off and is a hit. Cell phone/pda SHOULD be something people will buy and use. I know many people would like/use a Treo like object. But it would also have to have data transfer rates at about 56 k before people will enjoy using them. Slower than that is a HORRIBLE, frustrating experience. And the service (cellular) providers still haven't figured out how to bill people. By the minute for totally slow transfer rates (that the service provider controls and can keep slow) or by the kilobyte, where if you look at any sites with no ascii text or lots of flash you'll have to remortgage the house? Digital convergence is an idea. A theory. It would be nice to have one device that would do everything I, you, she, he, it, you, we, they wanted it to do. People are too particuar with what they want and will use. If the idea of a digital convergence were true, the wouldn't we all drive one of say 4 vehicles? One car, one truck, one Suv and one motorcycle. All cars do basically the same thing, so why do I want one different from my neighbor? Everyone uses a cell phone and a pda and a remote, so why doesn't everyone buy an iPod and all its extras? Why do some cars have heated seats and others don't? Why don't all cars come with air conditioning? Why don't all cars have wireless capabilities? Why doesn't apple make a car with wireless capabilities that will know how far I'm planning on driving today and will tell me to use my Segway and not it? I think cars should come with built in "pda's" that I can sync wirelessly from the house so I can have my grocery list in the car. No, wait!!! Every car should have a slot for my iPaq, Visor edge, Treo, Palm VII, Symbian, Symbol, Jornada, Cassiopia, Psion, so that I can use the build in GPS to see where I'm going, or read my email, or get stock quotes, or log my mileage, or ...

If anything, this world will become more and more cluttered with separate solitary devices. Some people like palm, some like Nokia, some like compaq, some like apple but can't afford it. How on earth will one company suddenly replace everyone's tastes and purchase ideas. Lots of people get a phone based only on what kind of a service plan comes with it. They don't care about the phone at all, just that the plan matches their needs. How will an all in one device solve that? It won't! As much as I, along with you, wish that this mumbo jumbo of separate devices could unite, that's as likely as asking the former yugoslavia ethnic groups to unite as one, or for quebec to stop being different or for the Basque people to stop wanting to be their own people. People are different and have completely different tastes, needs, and spending limits. If anything we will have more solitary devices than four "digital convergence" devices (four brands) that do "everything."

Its a goal, nothing more, and it ain't gonna happen... (proove me wrong, and I'll buy the product that proves me wrong the moment you point it out!)

Enjoyed your comeback,
Can't wait for the next one!

mmm, chicken foam!!!

[quote]
Thank you for your constructive follow-up. Do you have an iPod? Maybe you'd like my ideas better if you did.

<hr></blockquote>

If only my personal situation could withstand the impact of $400 departing my account. I have other more demanding priorities (unavoidable) right now. Perhaps in a year, or maybe a rich uncle will buy it for me? I'd love to have one, and I'd love it if it could do everything, but that's not realistic, so I'll be happy with what it has and one day I'll get one?

oh, and wireless is a buzzword, even if the others are not...

[ 12-17-2001: Message edited by: Chicken Tastes Good ]</p>
the empty can rattles the loudest
Reply
the empty can rattles the loudest
Reply
post #31 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by Voulge:
<strong>A powerfull but simple feature to add to the trojan horse :
Apple has already all the piece of the puzzle they need: network-booting of the OS, separate folder for every user’s related stuff (include. Preferences, &#8230 , network search of users, …
Imagine, you have OS-X on your internal HD (if you wish or if you have one) or in education or business (designer studios, consultants, &#8230 on a server and booted from that OS. Actually the Users’ identification panel makes a network wide research for users. Why can’t it make a research on an iPod connected via Firewire to your Mac ? Why ? Hum, it certainly can. And that’s the big Thing : you can sale very-low “Network-Mac” without HD and sales iPod-like devices for every user (the user has a MP3-player bonus ) that they can plug into the new Macs at home, school, business, … and always with there personal environment. Great isn’t it. You don’t need to charge your iPod with the entire OS, just your user-folder. Mine is actually 7GB big on my PowerBook G4, so is the iPod a little small, but wait a bit and the HD-size on it will grow.
That’s maybe a little Paradise-like vision : more Mac in the world, so more this concept is viable, HD-speed issue, but we have all dreams… Your digital live to go !
It actually can be done : on my cube -my server- I actually host my Users folder on a other partition as the OS (with a symbolic link), so I think I can place a user folder on my iPod (if I had one rolleyes: )</strong><hr></blockquote>

Very cool and definitely possible idea... Not simple but certainly possible - there would have to be some crazy hooks in the OS to allow for it, but it could be done!
the empty can rattles the loudest
Reply
the empty can rattles the loudest
Reply
post #32 of 33
What the hell happened here?
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #33 of 33
sorry, had alot to say...

perhaps I should change my sig?
the empty can rattles the loudest
Reply
the empty can rattles the loudest
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › iPod as trojan horse