or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Music Specific Machine?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Music Specific Machine?

post #1 of 36
Thread Starter 

The Classic has become part of my life now. I am 57 years old and began my music addiction with what is now called "Vintage Stereo Equipment" (most hand built in Japan). This equipment is still in most cases superior to anything available today and many older pieces are being restored and sold in preference to modern Chinese offerings. I have gone through Lps, and 45's, CD's (originally advertised as immune to scratches), and now learn that many audiophiles directly connect their computers to their 70's gear and play it that way.

 

Others like me transferred 30 years of music onto their iPod. Actually it was a blessing because radio has become so specific that I hadn't heard anything new other than Rap (Yuech!)  etc since 1985. I found about 20 years of great music on iTunes which I purchased, and even with the relatively low audio quality it was often superior to that of many older albums and with some of my equipment even that was fixable.

 

I can't describe the delight and amaxement to have my whole, or almost whole library on a small device like the iPod. Most of you younger people are used to lousy stuff like 3 dollar computer speakers and Apple ear buds.If you love music you need to hear it live or have great equipment.

 

But from the very beginning you could see the iPod's death. Why? Because it involved no monthly fee. This has always been the goal of these technical marvels. TV's were losers because after they sold the TV programming was free and the providers had to sell advertising. Apple as a company almost died from being greedy; wanting to own both the device, operating system and programs.Microsoft and IBM made money by licensing their designs etc.

 

The Cloud is worthless to me as it's free storage is small and I have no portable device that needs it, nor do I want one. I'm retired and bored and so used to do surveys, Apple ran survey after survey hoping that everyone would go to an iPhone, but a lot of people want their phone a phone.

 

I looked at the touch, but the programming was very different from the iPod and totally inappropriate both in design and capacity for music. Predictably, Apple has been forcing the music people out. First it was no more games, and hey some were fun, if I really want to play I go onto my computer or the xBox.., next was the end of the 180 g, and now the end of the games and soon the Classic. I have two spares, and my LP collection, so at some point I will just be forced out as a customer of Apple.

 

Instead of this craziness, why not make a really great entertainment device with flash or harddrive storage, clickwheel or whatever, I could care less... if it works, and I don't have to pay a monthly fee and control my own software. Make it great for music and games and pictures. A click out click in battery would be great for watching movies or playing games.    

post #2 of 36
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway View Post

But from the very beginning you could see the iPod's death. Why? Because it involved no monthly fee. This has always been the goal of these technical marvels.

 

Apple has repeatedly said the subscription model is a failure.


Apple as a company almost died from being greedy; wanting to own both the device, operating system and programs.

 

How is that "greedy"?


Apple ran survey after survey hoping that everyone would go to an iPhone, but a lot of people want their phone a phone.

 

Apple doesn't do market research. The iPhone is a phone. I don't understand what you're saying here.


I looked at the touch, but the programming was very different from the iPod and totally inappropriate both in design and capacity for music.    

 

Curious: how? Scrolling is easier than circling. Capacity will be fixed easily.


Instead of this craziness, why not make a really great entertainment device with flash or harddrive storage, clickwheel or whatever, I could care less... if it works, and I don't have to pay a monthly fee and control my own software. Make it great for music and games and pictures. A click out click in battery would be great for watching movies or playing games.

 

The iPod touch. And you don't need a removable battery with ten hours of life. What's wrong with that? It does everything you want here, and once it hits 128GB, the capacity problem will be solved.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #3 of 36
Thread Starter 

The last first. If you use up all of the battery life say watching a movie (those battery times are often wishful thinking) you have to recharge which is NOT fast. The replaceable battery was part of the original design overridden by Jobs himself.

 

The disagreeable programming i mentioned was the Touch's inability to form playlists etc. This may have changed, because hey, I didn't want or need one. At any rate, music use was not at the top of the list when designing the device. Insofar as the scrolling etc, I thought that I made it clear that that was no advantage to me one way or another. A click wheel is far more intuitive than the average cell phone and I'll argue that all day.

 

Greedy is a term. Where do you place greedy? 5%, 15%, 20% 2,000% where? Business models used to be made, and worked on far lower profit margins. I do know that whatever Apple is making on say the "Classic" is quit a bit more than I earn on my CD's at the bank. The reason for the rush into cell phones and their ilk is that you do not buy something and walk away. You pay the cell company money each month. I cannot believe that Apple doesn't get a portion of this. To select more space in the cloud over the 5G's that it comes with has a monthly fee, unlike the original ipod. And of course, if your music is all in the cloud, so  what's to stop Apple from charging a small monthly fee for access to your music? If the Touch can be made with 128 gig memory and appropriate programming I might go there when my iPods die, but until then I have to ask, "Was there some screaming demand for this product?"

 

Th subscription model may be a failure (yuk,Yuk talk to Comcast, and Verizon about that), but anything that has you paying a monthly fee is an ongoing expense. My phone costs me 29 dollars a month after taxes etc, what does yours cost? You kids think that a cell phone is essential and it isn't. How did we all get by before we had them? My guess is that doctors, firemen, policemen etc NEED cell phones, everyone else wants to play. I was one of the very first in Seattle to use one of the first "Bricks", and carried a pager before that. Whenwe went from pagers to phone all of a sudden there were all sorts of messages that we just had to deal with on the phone, most just annoying junk.

 

You've challenged me on the market research, but you just don't know what you're talking about. Okay maybe THEY don't they just hire some other firm to do it for them, but I have taken the research polls. "Is there any circumstances under which you might use a device which included a phone besides the other features?" etc Swear by the Almighty, I TOOK those polls. The Touch is extant because some people simply do not want a phone in their music/entertainment device.

 

While I'm at it how about a strange device called a "Gasp!" phone! A device dedicated to providing long and clear phone reception and coverage. These new phones have worse reception than the old bricks! 

post #4 of 36
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway View Post
The last first. If you use up all of the battery life say watching a movie (those battery times are often wishful thinking) you have to recharge which is NOT fast.

 

What movies do you have that are over 10 hours?


The replaceable battery was part of the original design overridden by Jobs himself.

 

Citation needed.


The disagreeable programming i mentioned was the Touch's inability to form playlists etc.

 

What's the etcetera? Because playlists have been possible for a while.


I thought that I made it clear that that was no advantage to me one way or another. A click wheel is far more intuitive than the average cell phone and I'll argue that all day.

 

Searching is roughly ten times as fast on the iPod touch.


I cannot believe that Apple doesn't get a portion of this.

 

Well, they don't. Believe it. A portion of the first-gen iPhone's plans DID go to Apple, but that was partial payment from AT&T for their horrid exclusivity. And only the first-gen.


To select more space in the cloud over the 5G's that it comes with has a monthly fee, unlike the original ipod.

 

1. Yearly
2. Yes, you did have to pay more for larger iPods.
3. These aren't even comparable items in the first place!


And of course, if your music is all in the cloud, so  what's to stop Apple from charging a small monthly fee for access to your music?

 

Nothing, because that is common freaking sense. it takes money to run servers, you should be paying for access thereto. iTunes Match charges for this, but that is ONLY for cloud access to music that you did not already buy in iTunes. Anything you bought in iTunes you my freely redownload, as many times as you want, at no charge. Forever.


If the Touch can be made with 128 gig memory and appropriate programming I might go there when my iPods die, but until then I have to ask, "Was there some screaming demand for this product?"

 

The demand for a 128GB iPod touch is as large as the demand for the iPod classic. Once it becomes financially unviable to continue making the iPod classic, they'll dump it entirely. By then no one will care, as better solutions will have existed for a long time.


Th subscription model may be a failure (yuk,Yuk talk to Comcast, and Verizon about that),

 

Yes, their customers sure love them to death. /s


My phone costs me 29 dollars a month after taxes etc, what does yours cost?

 

The iPhone? As little as $30.


You kids think that a cell phone is essential and it isn't.

 

Funnily enough, i agree with you. Being future-thinking makes me a kid?.


The Touch is extant because some people simply do not want a phone in their music/entertainment device.

 

No, the iPod touch exists because some people can't afford a cell phone plan or they couldn't care less about having one. Sounds like it's exactly what you want. Of course people would want a phone in it if they could have one.


A device dedicated to providing long and clear phone reception and coverage. These new phones have worse reception than the old bricks! 

 

You'll have to talk to the telecoms about that. They're responsible for audio quality not having increased in the last 25 years...


Edited by Tallest Skil - 2/1/13 at 6:39am

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #5 of 36
Thread Starter 

I can see that you are an Apple "True Believer" Handle snakes too? How many times do I have to say that the Touch exists is because after repeated polling which I actually, personally participated in there are pepople who just do not want a phone to be part of their entertainment system.

 

The market model almost dictates that Apple generates more money from the new devices, than the old. The largest difference is in the regular after purchase fees. If Apple isn't getting kickbacks from the cell phone companies, they're getting it from the apps or somewhere else. I can't support that factually, but the business model being pursued dictates that the link is there.

 

Once again I really do not care how the lousy screen works, so long as it works welll and long. The early Touch's were not set up for music with no playlists and no real classification of music etc. It's probably improved, because theyare discussing tossing out the Classic. I could care less really. I am no tech addict who needs the latest machine. Perhaps you are? My brother in law spent hours programming an early personal calendar and notebook. We all asked him if a simple paper notebook and a pencil wouldn't be faster (and cheaper) but he essentially said, "But this is cool".

 

The decision to not allow replaceable batteries was made directly by Jobs. Read it in Wired magazine. The battery was/is the first part to go bad, and usually that estimated time is just for laughs. It isn't that movies are so long, it's how long do you want to wait to charge your unit. Heavy video/game usage sucks the battery and lowers it's life.

 

I can't believe that you bring up this short search feature! I mean just how short does it have to be? With a click wheel the maximum time to find a specific recording is perhaps 5 seconds. Buddy, if this is too short for you I hope to never be in back of you in a que.

 

You assume that people would want a phone in one of these devices. Why? The Touch was originally developed beside the first iPhone simply because some people didn't want the d--n phone. I don't want, and a lot of people don't want one device that costs a mint and does stupid pet tricks and dances a hornpipe as well as play music and is a camera, phone etc. Some people want the best music device that can be made, the best phone and a great game machine, others a great portable computer. Why do all of thes have to be in the same device? To quote from "The Quiet Man" "When I drink whiskey I drink whiskey, when I drink water I drink water". I have a very new cell phone that cost about $100 and the plan. (I let my daughter pick it out). Neither the reception or battery life is as good as the original brick or the Motorolas that came out in 97. I couldn't find a cell phone that allowed me to use my fingers to text with,(need a stylus). I'm not impressed.

 

And again you prove my point with the cloud. Justified or not, you pay. More memory is a onetime payment. You say that it is justified for the servers, fine. Give me the hard drive instead

 

And no the sound quality is not just the com guys fault. I used to set up cell towers etc, was an industrial Electrical Contractor for 20 years. The reception is bad partly because of holes but also because of the design of the phones. Better receptions meanssending out a more powerful signal which requires more power and a bigger antennae. Reception is the same. Also the receivers have limited range to cancel background noise, but if a person has a big head a lot of what they say is lost.

 

You still refuse to address the main point. Why not a device designed around just music with some gaming and photos thrown in? 

post #6 of 36
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway View Post
How many times do I have to say that the Touch exists is because after repeated polling which I actually, personally participated in there are people who just do not want a phone to be part of their entertainment system.

 

You can say it as many times as you want; it's just not correct! They were always going to make a phone-less iPhone. 


If Apple isn't getting kickbacks from the cell phone companies, they're getting it from the apps or somewhere else.

 

They get 30% of every app purchase. That's to cover the cost of operating the App Store. 

 

Why are you so bent on finding a conspiracy where Apple is greedy? They're not. They're just frugal.


I could care less really.

 

Then why would you ask anything here at all? Looks like you're after a device from a different company. I mean, you've certainly done your research about the decision you want to make, and where you haven't you're just ignoring facts. Put 'em together and you have a whole pie, even if half of it is (poorly harvested, poisonous) rhubarb and the other pumpkin.


My brother in law spent hours programming an early personal calendar and notebook. We all asked him if a simple paper notebook and a pencil wouldn't be faster (and cheaper) but he essentially said, "But this is cool".

 

You can do that with your voice now. Times have changed. You repeatedly acknowledge this, and yet still reject the iPod touch simply because it's "different". Well, enjoy your iPod classic until it finally breaks and no repair parts exist for it.


The decision to not allow replaceable batteries was made directly by Jobs. Heavy video/game usage sucks the battery and lowers it's life.

 

The decision makes for a better product. Any use of the device for any purpose sucks the battery and lowers its life. Same with humans. All of our hearts beat roughly 2 billion times before they're kaput. The way you use your heart is no different than the way you use your battery. There are battery life extending procedures, just as there are healthier lifestyles. And the more work you do in a day, the more tired you are at the end. I don't understand why this would be foreign. You need rest in the middle of the day, take a catnap. You need more battery life after somehow having used ten hours worth already? Pop it on for a short charge. 

 


With a click wheel the maximum time to find a specific recording is perhaps 5 seconds. 

 

I challenge that. Going through the motions now, I don't see it as impossible, but it would require a mastery over the system that few have. As fast as any search can be done with a click wheel, it can be done more quickly with your voice or via the touchscreen.


You assume that people would want a phone in one of these devices. Why?

 

They'd want it if they didn't have to pay any more for it, just to clarify. With the current iPod touch, they expressly don't want a phone in it, as that costs $45 a month more, minimum.


I couldn't find a cell phone that allowed me to use my fingers to text with,(need a stylus).

 

I can find several hundred. Your daughter might not have been the best choice, no offense to yourself or her. 1wink.gif


I'm not impressed.

 

You're looking mainly at Android models; I'm not surprised. lol.gif


And again you prove my point with the cloud. Justified or not, you pay. More memory is a onetime payment. You say that it is justified for the servers, fine. Give me the hard drive instead.

 

I agree completely. Except where you claim you pay for the cloud; you don't. Not unless you want to.


Better receptions means sending out a more powerful signal which requires more power and a bigger antennae. Reception is the same. 

 

Oh, it's not all about reception; it's about being able to jam higher fidelity sound through limited bandwidth. They just don't care about anything more than "good enough", which then the cell phone manufacturers are told, causing them to only put in speakers and microphones equivalent to "good enough". Vicious cycle. 


…if a person has a big head a lot of what they say is lost.

 

The wisdom of this sentence extends far beyond telephony. Plus one to you just for that. 


You still refuse to address the main point. Why not a device designed around just music with some gaming and photos thrown in? 

 

Because they have. It's called the iPod touch. You will never get a different answer from anyone here, nor from Apple themselves. There's nothing more to be said about this.

 

At no point do you ever have to use the cloud. At no point do you ever have to download any apps onto this thing. In fact, you can do this to it.

 

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #7 of 36
Thread Starter 

It's been said before. A man who argues with a fool  is afool. You have consistently contradicted yourself and ignored what i had to say. I and a lot of other people really don'd like phones. This is incomprehensible for a lot of people. But Hey I didn't know why my aunt gave me a world globe with a transistor radio in it either.

 

Whatever the Touch is now, it was not designed to be a music specific device. Why they made it I do not know but must have taken 20 surveys exploring the ins and outs of the device with or without a phone what we wanted out of an Apple device etc.

 

Wax poetic over the human heart, but being able to replace a part that often goes wrong such as the battery is an advantage to the consumer.

 

You have tech knowledge of phones, but you know as well as I do that it takes a lot of juice to broadcast a signal out of a heavy dense building or over distance. This is the phone that I want. It isn't sold so I don't use a cell phone. I own one for taking on trips, but what I am interested is a phone machine that allows me to own my music without monthly fees and have it all available all of the time. If Apple screws the pooch as it has before, I will use old tech or load directly to my computer and connect it to my stereo.

 

If the Touch has the programming and capacity that Ineed when my Classics wear out in say 7 years, I will give them a good lookover. Examine any group of Ipod users and there is a strong group who are audiophiles and use the device specifically for that. I used to lay in bed at night listening to music and playing some arcade game or other.

 

If Apple really hasdesigned the Touch as an entertainment specific device with the classifications, playlists etc that the Classic has, and a 140 g capacity, perhaps they should be advrtising it for this purpose. I will not pay extra for cloud service. Presently the whole cloud biz is just very irritating;  more control for Apple, and totally designed for the bells and whistle mobile devices with no room for a hard drive. 

post #8 of 36
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway View Post
You have consistently contradicted yourself and ignored what i had to say.

 

Well, you got the action correct, if not the performer. Continue ignoring the truth and no one will bat an eye when the classic is discontinued. 


Whatever the Touch is now, it was not designed to be a music specific device.

 

See, except you can treat it as one.


Why they made it I do not know but must have taken 20 surveys exploring the ins and outs of the device with or without a phone what we wanted out of an Apple device etc.

 

Once again, they don't do that kind of market research.


Wax poetic over the human heart, but being able to replace a part that often goes wrong such as the battery is an advantage to the consumer.

 

Around 500,000,000 people don't care. Several tens of millions more don't care about that being a feature on their laptops, even!


…what I am interested is a phone machine that allows me to own my music without monthly fees and have it all available all of the time.

 

iPhone. Been available for five years.


If the Touch has the programming and capacity that Ineed when my Classics wear out in say 7 years, I will give them a good lookover.

 

It has that now. Maybe not the capacity for astonishingly huge music libraries, but the next model will top out at 128GB. 


I will not pay extra for cloud service.

 

And yet again, you don't have to use cloud services, much less pay for them. They're free for everyone for every purpose except extra storage and taking your pirated music and making it legal.

 


Presently the whole cloud biz is just very irritating;  more control for Apple, and totally designed for the bells and whistle mobile devices with no room for a hard drive. 

 

Completely incorrect. 5GB free isn't enough to do anything meaningful. It's fine for the consumer's consumer, but not for the creator or most regular people. 

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #9 of 36
Thread Starter 

Okay, let me get this straight because I don't want to leave anything out. Apple doesn't do market research before introducing new products, but if they do it's done by a third party so it doesn't count.

 

Aplle doesn't make more money off of their new line than the old line, but, okay they do and that's just part of the Capitalist Dream and we should all rejoice at the privilege.

 

They don't make monthly income from their current line, well okay they do but that's through apps so it doesn't count, and anyway it's more fun and once again we should rejoice in our participation in The Capitalist Dream.

 

The Touch has plenty of space for music on it's hard drive except for the high volume user (the people I have been discussing myself from the beginning).

 

I should switch to the Touch because it's more fun, not more suitable as a music device.

 

The cloud doesn't cost, except that it does if you want to store anything much on it, which is the purpose of the cloud and if you bother to read the posts concerning the cloud the capacity is a fairly large complaint by a lot of contributors.

 

Somehow it's odd that I would wait for my curren devices to wear out before buying a new one. Does living green mean anything to you? Ring a bell?

 

The battery size isn't a problem as it lasts 10 hours. You must know that 10 hours is VERY optimistic if the screen is being used for a video/game application, but optimistic in any case. Battery powered tools began with replaceable batteries allowing uninterrupted use of the tool as did "The Brick". Why? because out of the box it was used in a power intensive situaition. The cell phone push for some reason was to reduce it's size to almost unusable proportions. The same was done with the iPod although I never heard any complaint about it's size. Hell, the iPhone is substantially larger than most cell phones and no one seems to care, but this size issue also made for small batteries and buttons, antennaes etc. I use my iPOD plugged into a transformer most of the time. My Blackberry will be dead if I leave it uncharged and unused for 4 or 5 days and this is about typical for phones. You can or could change the batteries and go on, but they do not come with extra batteries or a battery charger and their installation isn't friendly to the mechanically challenged. If built in batteries are the answer, why is it when I got to Starbucks the best armchairs have someone rooted there using a laptop  plugged into the wall? I visited Barnes & Noble this week and counted about 12 people throughout the store with laptops plugged into the wall.The display is the juice sucking culprit. The same reason that the original Kindle has such an outrageously long battery life. They have a non standard monochrome display that just flips display polarities and does not generate light. 

 

I would be perfectly happy to own a small laptop with a 200G hard drive designed to manage my music that I could plug into my stereo. Many audiophiles are doing something similar, but have not researched this completely yet. These folks are not using MP3 players, CD players or turntables. This is the breaking edge, but not my generation. If there was a very small computer made for the purpose I would buy it. If I had such a thing I would be fine with a creepy Touch with a 2G memory, for when I travel. 

 

I'm sure that the touch is very cool. If I liked phones and items that did cool tricks I would probably be sucked in by the iPhone. If I had ANY use for the tablet I would probably own one. Apple is in the business to make money, I get it. Apple should also remember that it was almost traded with the penny stocks not so very long ago because of their insistence upon controlling hardware, operating system and software. Who buys Mac's? The people I know who do are authors and artists with too much money. When it comes to biz it's some version of the PC. Maybe Apple will pull this off give them the ultimate control over the data allowing people to have their "Dick Tracy Watch" or similar instead of laptop or desktop. I just want a machine designed for the high use music user who needs a lot of space and doesn't want to pay monthly fees.

post #10 of 36
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway View Post

Aplle doesn't make more money off of their new line than the old line, but, okay they do and that's just part of the Capitalist Dream and we should all rejoice at the privilege.

 

Where was that said or implied?


They don't make monthly income from their current line…

 

Not in the sense you're implying, no. Apple does not get a "take" of iPhone (iPad) users' cellular bills.


The Touch has plenty of space for music on it's hard drive except for the high volume user (the people I have been discussing myself from the beginning).


Correct.


I should switch to the Touch because it's more fun, not more suitable as a music device.

 

Incorrect; nothing about it makes it "unsuitable" as a music device.

 

Are there any studies as to which mechanism of interaction has been shown to be better? Really my question is if the click-wheel specifically has ever been shown to be better in any respect than a touchscreen. 


The cloud doesn't cost, except that it does if you want to store anything much on it…

 

Five gigabytes is tens of thousands of documents, e-mails, and notes.


Somehow it's odd that I would wait for my curren devices to wear out before buying a new one.

 

Really? I drive my vehicles to their death, use my appliances until their death, and generally treat my stuff well so that it lasts me a decade or more. That's not odd. I just switched over my 17 year old van for a newer SUV. It's too big and too high and I feel like I'm driving a boat, but the weather where I live pretty much forces me to need 4-wheel drive. 


Does living green mean anything to you? Ring a bell?

 

Trashing your perfectly-functional stuff after a year is "living green"? 


Apple should also remember that it was almost traded with the penny stocks not so very long ago because of their insistence upon controlling hardware, operating system and software. 

 

No, that's not the reason.


Who buys Mac's? The people I know who do are authors and artists with too much money.

 

15/10. Bravo. Haven't seen a troll job this good in a while. You had me actually thinking that you were just confused about the iPod touch, but really you don't give a flying frick about any information at all.

 

Either use your iPod until it dies and then go back to a phonograph or get used to the idea that the iPod touch can actually be used exclusively for music, despite what you're pretending to believe.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #11 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway View Post

Who buys Mac's? The people I know who do are authors and artists with too much money.

Bahahahaha. I'm not an author or an artist. Macs are bettter. End of story. 

 

 


Tim Cook using Galaxy Tabs as frisbees

 

Reply

 

 


Tim Cook using Galaxy Tabs as frisbees

 

Reply
post #12 of 36

When his first post, and the thread title is talking about a "music only machine", and his second post complains about how if you watch movies on your Touch, your battery runs out... making the Touch a poor device...

 

I realize that he's a troll and stop reading.

post #13 of 36
Thread Starter 

I have no idea who or what you  are. I have said repeatedy that the Touch doesn't interest me because what DOES is a music specific machine. Did you even read the title of the post? I KNOW that the Touch was not designed for music. It may have been made more compatable than it originally was, but that doesn't make it an audio specific machine. I feel somewhat better about buying one if my Classics all die, but until then I couldn't care less that it has a touch screen or claims 10 hours of battery life etc.

 

If you are going to complain that I'm a "troll" you might be "polite" enough while insulting me, to tell me what one is (outside of a fairy tale.). I talked about movies etc on the music device, because it was nice to listen to music while I played a game, and it WAS nice, I'll admit it, to have a machine that did more than one thing. However, I have game machines, and since you managed to take the discussion everywhere EXCEPT the audio only device, I responded. You brought it up, you got my answer.

 

Listen up Trolls, fairies, gremlins or whatever else you are, there are serious music listeners out in the big forest. Many of the serious audiophiles have switched to using music directly stored upon their computer and are bypassing CD players, Turntables and so on altogether. I would do the same if I had not invested so darn much money in iTunes. What I am talking about is a small laptop say 8"X6" that is pre-programmed for music, with notes and links between players, groups etc and also to make it easy to arrange your music library. It would need RCA plug jacks for out put as well as whatever else is current on modern amplifiers. A large hard drive of about 180 G's of memory would be necessary. This would negate the need for a lot of connecting cable between my computer and stereo, and allow me to move it from room to room.

 

I am not an Apple fan. I do not like their business model, and I am not the only one. Apple came very close to closing it's doors and not so very long ago either. Microsoft is soft these days as well. The key to business success is to give people what they want at what at least seems like a bargain. I resent the way my suggestion and I were treated here. If all you care to do is stroke your Apple products be my guest. I, like most people, want what I want, not to just enrich some corporation.

 

One last time. When I want a phone I want a phone that works and I don't want it to dance and whistle "Dixie". I want a sturdy quality product made specifically to do one job.

I visualized the music machine in the same way. The iPOD began as a music machine and somehow it has become lost or scrambled together with a telephone!? Unbelievable. 

post #14 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway View Post

Th subscription model may be a failure (yuk,Yuk talk to Comcast, and Verizon about that), but anything that has you paying a monthly fee is an ongoing expense.

Are those music subscriptions? If you must have pedantry, then OK, you may get it. Music subscription models failed. For whatever reason, the market doesn't treat music subscriptions the same way it treats video subscriptions. PlaysForSure subscription services failed, subscription services with the Zune couldn't save the Zune. XM and Sirius satellite services, despite its enthusiastic user base, couldn't compete either, they had to merge just to stay alive. Not only that, subscriptions cost money, I seem to recall you complaining about monthly fees a few times, why are you asking for a service that requires a monthly fee? It strikes me that, despite your assertions otherwise, you're moving goalposts to make an argument.

And you know what? An iPod Touch actually makes an excellent music player. It'll easily give you a full day's worth of audio playback, the screen goes to sleep after a few minutes.
Edited by JeffDM - 2/3/13 at 9:50am
post #15 of 36
Touchy touchy. I've always been a defender of the classic, and I would be the firat person to buy a 256 or 320GB Classic. I've got a (fat) 160GB Classic that is still going great, and that has surprisingly long battery life. I've owned iPods since the very first 5GB model, which I bought on the first day.

But the fact is, the iOS interface is honestly a FAR better experience for selecting a particular song (that's not in a short playlist) than the Classic or any other scroll wheel iPod.

And iTunes Match is amazing, as long as you are on a good strong network and not moving. If it weren't limited to 25000 tracks it would be even better. Like you, however, I prefer having all my music with me, even when there's no network available, which is the true benefit of a high capacity device.

And just because a device does more than you need it to do, doesn't mean the device is not the right device for you.

Given the choice of a 266GB Classic or a 256GB Touch, I would go with the Touch all the way, even if i intended to use it as just a music device. A 256GB Nano, however... That would be tempting.
post #16 of 36
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway View Post
I have no idea who or what you are.

 

Hopefully the first human to hit 150, but I'll need a little luck and a little more money than I currently have.


I have said repeatedy that the Touch doesn't interest me because what DOES is a music specific machine.

 

Guess what the iPod touch is. What a stumper. 


Did you even read the title of the post?

 

That's what confuses me so much.


I KNOW that the Touch was not designed for music.

 

You "know" completely incorrectly. These devices are what you make of them. Mick Jagger's daughter used a Macintosh as a painting machine. He didn't use one at all, but he was hopped up on drugs at the time. Some people use them to edit video. Some people have iPhones for personal use. Some are only allowed to use them for business. Some of this business is creative in nature, so the devices themselves are used for collaboration and creation. Others use them for music. If you want it to be a music-specific machine, it is a music-specific machine.


It may have been made more compatable than it originally was, but that doesn't make it an audio specific machine.

 

No device with a screen is an audio-specific machine. Keep that in mind when you shop for anything made this side of 1980. 


I feel somewhat better about buying one if my Classics all die, but until then I couldn't care less that it has a touch screen or claims 10 hours of battery life etc.

 

The iPod classic is far from an audio-specific machine. Bit of a double standard.


However, I have game machines, and since you managed to take the discussion everywhere EXCEPT the audio only device, I responded. You brought it up, you got my answer.

 

The device you want does not exist and has never existed from any company. The iPod touch is the new iPod classic. The latter is and has never been a music-specific machine. Even the early ones had games and calendars.


Listen up Trolls, fairies, gremlins or whatever else you are, there are serious music listeners out in the big forest. 

 

I like this line.


Many of the serious audiophiles have switched to using music directly stored upon their computer and are bypassing CD players, Turntables and so on altogether. I would do the same if I had not invested so darn much money in iTunes.

 

See, you claim you're not a troll, and you certainly write far more intelligently than one, but you keep to your earlier nonsensical beliefs and THEN you go and drop this bombshell on us, leaving us continue to scratch our heads. iTunes downloads are still 256kbps. One would imagine you'd have ALAC audio if you were actually an audiophile. I don't have the coin nor the desire to get a multi-(ten!)-thousand dollar speaker setup, but even I have ALAC because I can hear it.


What I am talking about is a small laptop say 8"X6" that is pre-programmed for music, with notes and links between players, groups etc and also to make it easy to arrange your music library.

 

A netbook running iTunes, but you'd need an external hard drive since netbooks don't come with "enough storage".


It would need RCA plug jacks for out put as well as whatever else is current on modern amplifiers.

 

It's a laptop. It's not going to have any of that, but you'd be able to get adapters for whatever you need.


A large hard drive of about 180 G's of memory would be necessary.

 

Yeah, I don't know of a netbook that ever got that big. And good luck even finding one anymore; the iPad killed them.


This would negate the need for a lot of connecting cable between my computer and stereo, and allow me to move it from room to room.

 

You could get an AirPort Express and AirPlay your music to each of your speaker sets wirelessly.


I am not an Apple fan. I do not like their business model, and I am not the only one. Apple came very close to closing it's doors and not so very long ago either.

 

But that has NOTHING TO DO WITH ITS BUSINESS MODEL. In fact, the "not so very long ago" was ludicrously long ago, and was borne of them NOT HAVING the business model that they currently have. 


The key to business success is to give people what they want at what at least seems like a bargain.

 

iPod touch. You don't like it, iPod nano. You don't like it, iPod shuffle. You don't like it, iPod classic. In basically that order. I guess you could make an argument for a tree with TWO trunks (touch, classic), leading up smaller branches (nano, shuffle), but only if you concede that the second trunk is rotten and hollow and there's a guy from the city coming out to mark it for removal sometime later this spring.


When I want a phone I want a phone that works and I don't want it to dance and whistle "Dixie".

 

LG still makes some good flip phones, I think. Maybe. Anyway, the VX5300 is a great little number.


I want a sturdy quality product made specifically to do one job.

 

iPod touch. Use it specifically FOR one job. It's just that simple.

 

You'll never find a car that can carry only one kind of passenger. You'll never find a house that can hold only one kind of family. You'll never find a company that wants only one kind of job. You'll never find a sandwich shop maker that makes only one kind of sandwich. 


The iPOD began as a music machine and somehow it has become lost or scrambled together with a telephone!?

 

If you don't like that, BUY. AN. IPOD. TOUCH. Or buy some useless crap from someone else. Zen isn't completely bankrupt yet, so maybe their poorly-built, tacky-looking, unusably-interfaced products will fit your bill.

 

Oh, I guess not. See, it says "microphone" and "photos" there, and you wanted a music-specific machine.

 

There's nothing more that anyone can tell you, regardless of where you go. You're looking for validation for your own beliefs, but your beliefs are just wrong to begin with. I'm glad you at least accepted some of what we (I guess it was just me) said in that you don't seem to be complaining about the cloud anymore.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #17 of 36
"If you want it to be a music-specific machine, it is a music-specific machine"

That's the kicker. And the Touch is awesome for finding a single track out of 20,000. Swipe left, type three letters, tap once. The Classic... Notsomuch.
post #18 of 36
Thread Starter 

For once someone other than my usual tormentor commented. "Tallest Skil" is that you? I looked up "Troll" and frankly it sounds more like YOU!   If I knew how to store music on my computer and directly transfer it to a Receiver made circa 1975, I would probably be doing it, but prior to NOW i had a wife who was not a big audiophile. She died about 5 months ago and since then I have gone back to my bachelor ways and live with my stereo. One of the artifacts from the days while my wife was still alive is my iPod. I could access my music and listen to it on a $400 pair of earphones. Now I listen to that iTunes music through a Marantz CD player that has electronics to enhance the mp3 type file to sound much more analog which it does in fact do.

 

While repairing my receiver I was told by the seller of a turntable that most modern audiophiles put their music  directly upon their computer and connect it someway using ethernet cable etc to their amp to directly load their music. I do not know how to do this and have invested a large amount of money in iTunes music. It occurred to me that Apple COULD create a small laptop type device designed especially for music  including software to educate you and tie your music together. Example? Who played on this album-song whatever? Who else did he play with, was he a  regular contributor etc. Yes, Yes, this is available seperately but the idea is an audio device set up to have it all present upon the one device.

 

Whether the Touch is equal or superior to the Classic is neither here nor there if it has the same hard drive capacity. If I have to pay for storage on the cloud I just won't. All of you can love your Mac's and iPhones etc and I could care less. The only reason that I brought any of that up is that I feel that Apple's need for control has not always been healthy for the company and "Tallest Skill" took the discussion in that direction. I  am somewhat reassured that if my iPods die that there is a replacement waiting, but playing with the Touch holds little interest for me.

post #19 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway View Post

It occurred to me that Apple COULD create a small laptop type device designed especially for music  including software to educate you and tie your music together. Example? Who played on this album-song whatever? Who else did he play with, was he a  regular contributor etc. Yes, Yes, this is available seperately but the idea is an audio device set up to have it all present upon the one device.

The iPod touch does that, but you don't care.
Quote:
Whether the Touch is equal or superior to the Classic is neither here nor there if it has the same hard drive capacity.

It's the entire argument you've pretended to make this entire time, but sure.
Quote:
If I have to pay for storage on the cloud I just won't.

Refer to any post here whatsoever to see that you don't have to.
Quote:
The only reason that I brought any of that up is that I feel that Apple's need for control has not always been healthy for the company

On the contrary, the only time they have ever langished is when they didn't do that.
Quote:
and "Tallest Skill" took the discussion in that direction. 

Corrected your misconception, yes.
Quote:
I  am somewhat reassured that if my iPods die that there is a replacement waiting, but playing with the Touch holds little interest for me.

By the time your classic dies, they won't be selling it anymore.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #20 of 36
I currently have 21,664 songs on my iPod classic. Let's say I want to find the song "Summer's Cauldron" by XTC.

I'm testing this now, from the topmost menu...

22 seconds. I had to circle around and around and around, trying not to go too far, circle back, then wade through all the "S" tracks without going too fast, or I would start cycling through the letters again, and have to start the whole process again.

It worked when the Classic was limited to 30GB. When you have 20,000 songs, it's crap.

To find the same song and start playback from the topmost menu on the Touch takes less than 5 seconds.

There is no truth to the ridiculous argument that the iOS interface is "totally inappropriate for music playback". That's the stupidest, most inaccurate assessment I've seen in a long while that didn't involve politics.

post #21 of 36
That said, my absolute perfect "music specific machine" would be the same size as the iPod nano, search function with keyboard interface, 256GB, BlueTooth and AirPlay.
post #22 of 36
Even without the capacity, and without the search function, and without AirPlay, the latest Nano is still an amazing "Music Specific Machine".
post #23 of 36
Thread Starter 

You guys just don't get it, and mr Troll (yes, I've learned the term now), or " Tallest Skil" as he calls himself seems to have set himself up as some sort of personal nemisis.

 

If you want to just run a playlist any of these handhelds will do that. I would be interested to know what ALAC is, but again Mr Tall didn't READ my post. I am an audiophile from the 70's. The heart of my equipment are two "Vintage" receivers, the Sansui 9090 DB  made in I think 1975, and refurbished last year and a Concept 16.5 when I want to blow the doors off. I have a Technics 1300 turntable with two cartridges: a shure IV and a Pickering. Some of the styli are very hard to find and prohibitively expensive so do not use the turntable except for rare occaisions. I also employ a graphic equalizer and a dbx 228 that adds back in top and bottom frequencies taken out of recordings at the booth and removes the dust scratch sound from older records. I have 6 7 speakers at the moment, a pair of the original Epos 2-way speakers, two Polk floor speakers (recently offered $4,000 for the pair) and two Orb speakers with a 10" subwoofer.

 

I employ qa Marantz cd player after on of my kids poured a coke into my vintage Sony, but the Marantz has a special MP3 hook-up that allows you to run your ipod through the Marantz sound enhancement system. Not perfect, but it about does for the mp3 recordings what the dbx does for the poorer lp's. I am sorry but it doesn't take me any 22 seconds to look up a specific recording unless I'm dealing with say ten different recordings of the Brandenburg's.

 

What I have been trying to say is that the mp3 player is a compromise from the beginning because the file cannot contain as much info. I am not savvy to modern tech, but know that while the sound can be surprisingly good when put together with a $400 pair of Shure earbuds or top of the line Westone's, the experience is lacking when compared to a room environment. 

 

Something like the proposed "High" capacity Touch comes close to providing ME with a replacement for my Classic, the other gizmos are of little value TO ME, or to a person wanting an audiophile machine. The capacity has to be big because standard MP3 files would not be used, and to make it attractive it would have to have software onboard to appeal to a music person. People would like to see the original album cover, the  studio, the studio musicians , perhaps what the other musicians did later as well. What's wrong with a regular keyboard? It would be rarely used. Most listeners would make playlists and then just run them. Genius never works for me by the way. How it manages to avoid using my own song ratings is incredible to me. Too many people like yourselves assume that everyone both lusts for new tech and knows how to use it. Such is not the case.

 

Instead of protecting the Touch as if it were your own three year old, why not consider a new device? If Apple is such a genius outfit they could put back a lot of what is taken out of a file to make it an MP3, back IN,  like digital cameras do with their vision of reality. I find it pretty pitiful to go to a party and have people turn on their computer and iTunes and play something through their $25 computer speakers. My son in law came over when I had my stereo playing some Pink Floyd and he insisted upon staying for almost 6 hours saying that he'd never heard music like that before. He didn't mean Pink Floyd either. We went through all of his favorites.

 

Again, the device could easily be a small laptop like those baby Acer's, but with input and outputs specific to the audio world, and helpful and intuitive programming. One thing that I give Apple very high marks on is their ladder system of organization. On the classic it's swirl, click, swirl click and you're there. I got lost on an iPhone because it just does so much random stuff. If all that it did was be a telephone I'd buy one.(With a replaceable battery). I really don't understand you guys. I ran a large, very successful, Industrial/commercial Electrical contracting business for 20 years. We used a lot of batery powered tools, but would NEVER have purchased one that had to be recharged. They all came with a spare battery and a charging unit.. You had NO downtime with the unit and it was expected to take a lot of abuse and still work. Have none of you used these tools or this arrangement? My audiophile music system could easily be a stationary plug in device, but anything mobile just seems lacking with those built in batteries.  

post #24 of 36
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway View Post

I would be interested to know what ALAC is, but again Mr Tall didn't READ my post. 

 

Lossless audio, as opposed to MP3 or M4A. These files retain that sound quality, at the cost of size, of course.


What's wrong with a regular keyboard? It would be rarely used.

 

Then what's wrong with a software one?


Too many people like yourselves assume that everyone both lusts for new tech and knows how to use it. Such is not the case.

 

That's why I'm saying use the iPod touch as a music player only.


Instead of protecting the Touch as if it were your own three year old, why not consider a new device?

 

Hey, now you just have to ask that question of yourself.


Again, the device could easily be a small laptop like those baby Acer's, but with input and outputs specific to the audio world, and helpful and intuitive programming. 


Or you could get an iPod touch or plug in your iPod classic.


On the classic it's swirl, click, swirl click and you're there.


On the iPod touch it's swipe, type, touch and you're there.


I got lost on an iPhone because it just does so much random stuff. If all that it did was be a telephone I'd buy one.


Home Button takes you back wherever you are.


We used a lot of batery powered tools, but would NEVER have purchased one that had to be recharged. They all came with a spare battery and a charging unit.. You had NO downtime with the unit and it was expected to take a lot of abuse and still work. Have none of you used these tools or this arrangement?

 

No, we just don't have any downtime since we charge at night.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #25 of 36
I think ALAC and a higher capacity is exactly what the OP wants.

Or use a laptop, and again, ALAC.

Why would a laptop need RCA output, for goodness' sake? You don't lose any sound quality by using a simple 1/8" to RCA Y-adapter, and you could use the audio port for headphones as well.

ALAC is "Apple Lossless Audio Codec". It preserves 100 percent of CD audio quality, which is way better than any mp3 with any DA conversion algorithm. It's built in to iTunes. In iTunes just change your import settings. But that won't help the quality of the mediocre AACs and MP3's you're "invested" in. You should have stuck with physical CDs. Amazon is a good source.
post #26 of 36
Thread Starter 

If you all were more familiar with audio equipment this all would be an easier conversation. If I had realized that this was a forum for Apple fans I probably would not have posted here at all. I was led here by Google after cheking to see if Apple by some fluke had offered any new games, and then hearing rumors that the Classic was to be scrapped.

 

IMHO NONE of the devices currently offered by Apple is "music Specific" from an audiophiles, or musically obsessed person's point of view. I'm sorry and I apologise in advance, but if you are satisfied with the sound coming out of ANY of the current Apple machines, your musical standards are not especially high. And I totally take your point that definitionally a "Shuffle" or whatefer is a music Specific Machine, but you are really just splitting hairs to win an arguement.

 

You all seem like bright people, so I have to assume that you are simply defending equipment that you believe to be wonderful. My apologise. No one insults someone's mother without drawing down wrath.

 

I am NOT a computer savvy person. I was 40 when I got my first computer and 46 when I first messed with the internet. Still, I have not heard of a music specific computer, or websites that sell complete song files that go to a specific program designed to play on a first rate Stereo. This ALPAC or whatever seems like what is being used, but I am not familiar with it and this is so, why not a sub section of iTunes to sell to the users, upgrade of song to these full standards, and then finally. why not a device specifically designed for the purpose?

 

So many people under 40 have never even listened to music from a first rate stereo. Younger friends and family are blown away when listening to mine and it certainly isn't the ultimate machine. Why RCA plug jacks? Look at the back of any standard Audio amplifier. It doesn't take a small headphne jack and there's a reason for this.Some of the newest audio equipment uses other hook-ups but so many of the older models, (still the preferred models by the way), use RCA plug jacks. The connection has a lot of area and is under spring tension preventing signal loss or distortion.

 

I'm sorry about your speed issues, but I have around 120 G's of music and it takes me around 5 seconds to find an album. Individual songs I put in playlists.

 

The attractions of the device I've been trying to describe are: 1.) Set up to receive music downloads without any special programming effort on the user's part, 2.) The ability to transfer iTunes library (for a cost good capitalist!) into full audio files. 3.) the ease of doing a search that is not stupid like the itunes search but is spelling forgiving 4.) software readout on the album, where recorded, musicians etc 5.) Perhaps a secondary memory for back up. 6.) A screen large enough to show details and album notes so common on albums recorded before 1985. 7.) Output jacks compatable  with your audio equipment that do not necessitate a special "Y" splitter, and giving up your headphone input. 8.) Space for all of your music library 9.) a mechanical keyboard. Ask any gamer, or CAD user why they prefer mechanical keyboards. The "virtual" keyboards are inexact and tiring to use. My large fingers makes it necessary for me to use a pencil to text, The gestures of a virtual board necessarily means holding your arms out which becomes tiring. An actual, mechanical button lets you know when you are pushing it and not the adjacent key. You will ask, so, my wrists are 10" around and my left index fingertip is 1" across.

 

Finally, just to define terms is a machine that does apps, movies, music, photos, books, telephone, be considered a Music Specific Device?  

post #27 of 36
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway View Post
IMHO NONE of the devices currently offered by Apple is "music Specific" from an audiophiles, or musically obsessed person's point of view. I'm sorry and I apologise in advance, but if you are satisfied with the sound coming out of ANY of the current Apple machines, your musical standards are not especially high.

 

Listen to us. We're not going to repeat this again. ALAC is lossless audio. It differs from records and CDs in one way, which is you can't scratch an ALAC file. The device has NOTHING to do with the quality of audio. All Apple devices can hold and output lossless audio of the quality you desire.


…why not a sub section of iTunes to sell to the users, upgrade of song to these full standards…


Some of us are asking the same thing. Hopefully they will offer lossless audio one day.


1.) Set up to receive music downloads without any special programming effort on the user's part, 2.) The ability to transfer iTunes library (for a cost good capitalist!) into full audio files. 3.) the ease of doing a search that is not stupid like the itunes search but is spelling forgiving 4.) software readout on the album, where recorded, musicians etc 5.) Perhaps a secondary memory for back up. 6.) A screen large enough to show details and album notes so common on albums recorded before 1985. 8.) Space for all of your music library    

 

And for the, what, seventh time, even though you couldn't care less, the iPod touch does all of this.


7.) Output jacks compatable with your audio equipment that do not necessitate a special "Y" splitter, and giving up your headphone input. 

 

iPod touch will do this, too. You just need an adapter for whatever isn't 3.5mm.


9.) a mechanical keyboard.

 

Nonsense. Your iPod classic doesn't even have any sort of keyboard and you get along fine. Virtual ones work perfectly well and are far less tiring since you're not actually requiring force to push against any objects.


Ask any gamer, or CAD user why they prefer mechanical keyboards. The "virtual" keyboards are inexact and tiring to use.

 

I use whatever kind of keyboard the Apple one is plus a trackpad for gaming. None of this "low latency mouse" mumbo-jumbo. lol.gif


You will ask, so, my wrists are 10" around and my left index fingertip is 1" across.

 

I'm holding up my hand, trying to picture one twice its size… and I have large hands, so this is problematic.

 

Note also that the iPod touch searches (searches, plays, and commands) for music with your voice, as well. If the keyboard is too small, even in landscape, Siri removes that problem entirely.

 

Finally, just to define terms is a machine that does apps, movies, music, photos, books, telephone, be considered a Music Specific Device?

 

Yes. Because you can go ahead and NOT use it for ANYTHING except MUSIC. By this criteria, no device ever made is specifically for music. 

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #28 of 36
Thread Starter 

Mr Tallest Skil, who appointed youeveryone's spokesperson? Do you have a Napoleon complex as well as being extremely rude? Do you write adictionary or something similar? Use specific means just that, used only for one thing and designed and maximized for one thing.

 

I get that you are all Apple-O-Philes and no intelligent response can be expected here about an Apple product, rather just cherished when found. But over and over every one of you refuses to comment upon my proposal. At some point, if this conversation was carried on long enough, someone might actually give me a decent description of ALAC, or I would research it myself, but I could tell you something similar. "Hey dude, just get a laptop and put all sorts of stuff on it. You don't need no "Touch" or iPOD or whatever. Do it all on your PC". You'd talk , as I have done, about the benefits of specificity and I could just laugh at you. It's rude and dumb.

 

If Apple DID build my machine, would you all be jumping up and down and proclaiming another Apple masterpiece? This isn't complicated. I know how to jury-rig an iPOD to work with a stereo, but that was never the idea. The IPhone and Touch and Classic and Shuffle were meant to be very portable multi-use money makers. There's a reason why people pay to go to the Symphony rather than to a one man band. One attempts to do everything adequately, the other does it's specific function superlatively.

post #29 of 36
You lost all credibility when you claimed to be an audiophile who has purchased a large amount of music in iTunes.

Audiophiles don't do that. ITunes music is currently limited to 240kbps compressed audio, which will never sound as good as a CD, no matter what equipment you have.

An audiophile who wanted to use a computer/iPod setup would buy the music on CD (or better), rip it as ALAC and either listen through quality headphones, or connect it to their stereo through a dock connector that has line out, and yes, a y-cable. That's what would produce the best possible sound quality. It doesn't matter really whether the iPod or computer connected through that y-cable is a Classic or a Touch or a Mac Mini. The sound quality is what matters, not the device.

You're not an audiophile. You're a stubborn old fogey with antique equipment who doesn't listen to well-intentioned advice.
Edited by tonton - 2/7/13 at 2:40pm
post #30 of 36
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway View Post

I get that you are all Apple-O-Philes and no intelligent response can be expected here about an Apple product…

 

Dang, was I ever right! But again, kudos for being so subtle about it.


But over and over every one of you refuses to comment upon my proposal. 

 

You want to waste money on an entire laptop computer dedicated for the playback of music and music alone. We're ignoring your proposal because it's nonsensical, not because the thought of having all of your media in one (small) place, accessible easily, is silly.

 

If you want to do this, feel free. Spend over $1,000 on hardware far more powerful than you'll ever need for the lifespan of its use and which will do the technology equivalent of sitting and rotting away. Or $350 on a Windows laptop that you'll need to replace every two years.

 

You refuse to listen to our repeated attempts to save you that money by telling you the iPod touch does everything you want and is a dedicated music machine. That's why it exists; to NOT be a phone. Use exactly what you want exactly how you want it. And you can command your music with your voice!


At some point, if this conversation was carried on long enough, someone might actually give me a decent description of ALAC…

 

Already did. Twice. It's your fault for ignoring it.


"Hey dude, just get a laptop and put all sorts of stuff on it. You don't need no "Touch" or iPOD or whatever. Do it all on your PC". 

 

That's basically what you're proposing. We're saying this isn't the only way. In fact, there are many better, cheaper ways, all of which you're dismissing because you refuse to listen to any information other than what you provide yourself.


If Apple DID build my machine, would you all be jumping up and down and proclaiming another Apple masterpiece?

 

Of course not. It's an expensive niche product that hasn't been needed since the late '90s. 


There's a reason why people pay to go to the Symphony rather than to a one man band.

 

There's a reason people use lossless audio files instead of 128kb/s MP3. But both can be put on any iPod.


 One attempts to do everything adequately, the other does it's specific function superlatively.

 

No music player is going to give you better anything than any of Apple's hardware. Apple's hardware doesn't inherently play back files in better quality than anyone else's stuff. Lossless is lossless. If you have the files and the hardware to play them, it's all dependent on the speakers.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #31 of 36
Thread Starter 

You know so little. You assume that I even knew what an MP3 file was when I began to buy them. I was married to a lovely woman with Bi-Polar disorder. Much of our loose money went to her care. I was disabled in a construction accident. I replaced most of my LP's with iTunes music. I mean, hey, you all defend Apple products with every breath you breath, why should it be any diffeent now? Did Apple tell the buyer that these files were inferior to CD, or LP recordings prior to purchase? They were cheaper which was my concern at the time. 

 

I Listened with earpods so as not to disturb my wife. My main receiver is over 40 years old and needed to be repaired. Extra money went to my now dead wife thank you very much. Being an audiophile can mean two things. (By the way, why am I defending myself to you? Who are you? What are your credentials?) It can either mean someone who loves music and has the best equipment that he can afford or someone who is rich and can indulge him or herself in the latest gear etc. I have never been in the 2nd category until now. So put your opinions about my being an audiophile where the sun doesn't shine. Who are you to even have an opinion? I've laid my cards on the table. Who are you sir?

 

Why should I worry about my "credibility"? Am I applying for a job, or standing before the Supreme Court? I am here just like you. In my opinion you ALL have almost NO credibility since you simply defend Apple products without discussing them rationally, or critiquing my suggestion in an intelligent manner. Are YOU an audiophile? Do you consider yourself one? How familiar are you with vintage equipment? Are you aware that there is a whole cottage industry which restores and sells vintage equipment because it is considered superior to modern offerings? If you doubt me as usual, look at the Ohm speaker website as a small example.

 

And by the way "Tallest Skil" your last statement is sheer...nonsense. Speakers are a huge part of music sure, but so is the power and how it's supplied, with what level of reliability, depth and length of ability to transmit power especially during heavy extended bass loads such as are found in  certain sorts of classical music. And as I am "sure" you are aware, most music is altered as it is recorded distorting it really before it goes on the CD or whatever. This was recognised decades ago. Lp's have great sound reproduction, so why did I want a dbx unit for? Because the guy mixing the music in the booth shapes the music to better suit consumer sound equipment. This usually consists of cutting off the lower and higher decibels, to reduce obvious voice distortion on high notes or sheer failure to reproduce on the lower ones.

 

I will say this one last time. Everything that the various functions that the Apple products do could be done by a PC and a telephone. And yet, you buy Touches, iPhones etc WHY? Why not just program your computer and use a land line which produces superior reception? The answer is obvious. The Apple products are design specific. You don't have to alter something , it's already ready for it's use. That is what I've been suggesting for my proposed machine, and maybe a premium music section at iTunes.

post #32 of 36
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway View Post
I mean, hey, you all defend Apple products with every breath you breath, why should it be any diffeent now? Did Apple tell the buyer that these files were inferior to CD, or LP recordings prior to purchase? 

 

What responsibility are you claiming they had in this regard? 1oyvey.gif

 

They were cheaper which was my concern at the time. 

 

Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick two. It's how every industry works.


Being an audiophile can mean two things. (By the way, why am I defending myself to you? Who are you? What are your credentials?) It can either mean someone who loves music and has the best equipment that he can afford or someone who is rich and can indulge him or herself in the latest gear etc. I have never been in the 2nd category until now. So put your opinions about my being an audiophile where the sun doesn't shine. Who are you to even have an opinion? I've laid my cards on the table. Who are you sir?

 

I assume this is directed at tonton. Your questioning him does nothing for your point.


In my opinion you ALL have almost NO credibility since you simply defend Apple products without discussing them rationally, or critiquing my suggestion in an intelligent manner. 

 

Just as some of our opinions about your audiophile status are wrong, so too is this opinion, borne of zero fact or reason, of yours.


And by the way "Tallest Skil" your last statement is sheer...nonsense. Speakers are a huge part of music sure, but so is the power and how it's supplied, with what level of reliability, depth and length of ability to transmit power especially during heavy extended bass loads such as are found in  certain sorts of classical music.

 

Please tell me you don't buy Monster cables. Data is data. Yes, you can have a cable longer than is recommended in the specification, but that's just not going to happen in this specific use case. The file will sound the same regardless of what cable it was passed over.


I will say this one last time. Everything that the various functions that the Apple products do could be done by a PC and a telephone. And yet, you buy Touches, iPhones etc WHY?

 

One last time: 

 

  • Because we use our computers elsewhere and don't want to be constantly messing with wires*.
  • Because the iPod family is a cheaper solution that compromises NOTHING on the audio quality side.
  • Because it's ludicrous to have to deal with the power draw of a full computer when you could sip power with an iPod on your speaker set
  • Because OS X is about the experience of use and the integration of hardware and software.
  • Because there are thousands of tiny, everyday things that we just don't have to worry about anymore thanks to the engineering that went into both devices. Because we shouldn't have to ever worry about these things.

 

You would buy the iPod touch to be a standalone music machine because it is a standalone music machine. 

You would buy the iPod touch to save cubic meters of space on CDs and LPs.

You would buy the iPod touch to have software designed specifically for feeding you up music and software designed specifically for the navigation thereof.

You would buy the iPod touch to have your audiophile-quality files all in one place and to use an industry standard connector to serve that audio up anywhere you chose. 

 

That's it. You'll never receive a different answer from anyone else, anywhere else. If you want to go back to the '70s and have an entire room full of your music, that's your call. We're telling you that all of your music can sound just as you want it and fit in your pocket. 

 

Believe whatever you want to believe.

 

*AirPlay of audio is often done, though. Again, no loss of quality, just a few thousandths of a second of lag as you input commands.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #33 of 36
Thread Starter 

Mr Skil, You have added virtually nothing to ths discussion except volume. You know very little about stereo equipment. If you ever went to an audiophile site you would have realised that audiophiles identify themseles online by describing their system. "Bong" disqualified! as you are quite happy to say about me.

 

For anyone who has actually read this with any interest, esp anyone at Apple, consider what I have proposed. Exchanging insults is a stupid and nonproductive pursuit. To Apple developers; the device that i have described here would work equally as well as a home theater device or home audio device.I know of no DEVICE which is preset, programmed and designed  for this task. Handhelds do what they do and are what they are. For every equipment line there has to be a Cadillac or Lincoln. For your handhelds it seems to be your iPHONE, you have no such ultimate device for those with home stereo or home audio. Those tech savvy can get around this , but why the iPOD was a success was that you has a package that was easy to use

 

I used to look at MP3 players but didn't buy one because I had no idea about how to get music onto it. With the iPOD there was iTunes. There are bluray players but they were out before they were in. CD's are dieing. Look to the future. 

post #34 of 36
There's no market in what you propose. Period. Look for it from someone besides Apple. What you want will NEVER be available from Apple. Ever.

Now, if you want to make the best of what IS available, Tallest has very good advice to give. If you'll back off and listen.
post #35 of 36
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway View Post
If you ever went to an audiophile site you would have realised that audiophiles identify themseles online by describing their system. 

 

I don't care about e-penis measuring. What does this have to do with anything?


"Bong" disqualified! as you are quite happy to say about me.

 

That's hilarious. Claiming I'm not an audiophile because I didn't tell you about my machine. Good stuff.


For anyone who has actually read this with any interest, esp anyone at Apple, consider what I have proposed. To Apple developers; the device that i have described here would work equally as well as a home theater device or home audio device.I know of no DEVICE which is preset, programmed and designed  for this task.

 

Nope. Their existing devices already do. So they're not going to waste their time with this.


Handhelds do what they do and are what they are.

 

The iPod touch, for example, is a great little number that people plug into their stereos and through which they control their music.


…you have no such ultimate device for those with home stereo or home audio. 

 

Except for the iPod touch.

 

Those tech savvy can get around this , but why the iPOD was a success was that you has a package that was easy to use

 

Wonder why the iPod touch is a success, then. Because it's hard to use?


There are bluray players but they were out before they were in. CD's are dieing. Look to the future. 

 

It astonishes me that a man can be so right about some things and so hypocritical about others.

 

At this point, shouldn't you notice that either:

 

A) You refuse to listen to anything said to you in any respect at any time

B) Apple doesn't make a device like you want (no one does), so you'd be better served looking at some other company for one (don't; no one does).

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #36 of 36
Dear Doctor John,

If you would listen to what I and Tallest have to say, you could actually get more quality music performance from what is available today.

Best regards,

Ben (not an audiophile -- thank God for that -- but certainly an audio quality aware music lover)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Music Specific Machine?