or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Multi-touch video iPods to arrive in August - report
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Multi-touch video iPods to arrive in August - report - Page 2

post #41 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmjoe View Post

I agree.

OK, but in your idea, you remove <$15 worth of communication chips and add $100 in mass storage hardware. Plus Apple gets $$$ from AT&T for the iPhone. Sorry, I don't see that being cheaper than the iPhone either.

since the R&D is done, and the cost of components goes down constantly, why not use the same components that you're already manufacturing? what's the total component price of the iPhone in today's dollars? $220?

swap the 8 gigs of flash for an 80 gig HDD and charge $399? [i don't know the component cost for 80gig drives vs. 8gigs of flash...]
post #42 of 104
Wintek says it isn't true.

http://www.wintek.com.tw/News_Show.asp?no=0000478
post #43 of 104
How does any information in that article add up to the headline? Congratulations, AppleInsider, you got your hits for the day.
post #44 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirrel_Monkey View Post

How does any information in that article add up to the headline? Congratulations, AppleInsider, you got your hits for the day.

Welcome to AI...

-Clive
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
post #45 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirrel_Monkey View Post

How does any information in that article add up to the headline? Congratulations, AppleInsider, you got your hits for the day.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post

Welcome to AI...

-Clive

There's nothing at all wrong with AI's headline or article. It cited a Digitimes article that claimed exactly what the headline says.
post #46 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowdog74 View Post

Apple has hired on additional engineers in some key areas that hint at the multitouch technology becoming the ubiquitous next-gen interface in most of their products.

First there's the addition of panel engineers outside of the iPhone team whose job it will be to work on larger multitouch surfaces. Then there's what appears to be the formation of a "Mobile Mac" business unit within Apple, and a Manager of Mobile Mac Architecture, which is decidedly aimed at developing a product line of portable computing/communications platforms.

Also is the fact that Apple acquired Fingerworks, a company that developed multitouch interfaces... In order for Apple to justify this acquisition, it has got to be for more than a narrow purpose...e.g. iPhone product line only.

In talking with a former Apple product engineer who was around at the time Jobs returned to Apple, he is very keen on the fact that the iPhone uses an ARM processor. ARM is a joint venture between Apple and other partners which makes designs for processors specifically for mobile communications platforms. The Newton/e-Mate used an ARM processor and was Apple's first, but poorly organized, attempt at getting into the mobile computing/communcations (e.g. PDA) market.

My colleague also pointed out that Apple's product development typically involves the introduction of a "feeler" product (e.g. 1st gen iPod) with a small, focused set of features, designed to elicit feedback from the market on a given concept that Apple's been toying with. iPhone is just that... Multitouch is the concept and they're trying to gauge public reaction to it to help shape how they use it in future products.

After 1st Gen iPod came Nano, and Shuffle, iPod Photo, iPod Video, etc. iPhone is more than likely not the flagship product... but the feeler product, after which both smaller and larger implementations of the multitouch technology will take hold.

I think we're likely to see 3G/HSDPA or even 4G/WiMax-enabled ultra-portables with multitouch technology that lie somewhere between a PDA and a tablet computer in terms of size.

Another suggestion regarding how far Apple wants to go with Multitouch is not only Microsoft's reaction, i.e. to announce their entry into the multitouch game, but also the fact that many of Leopard's design enhancements seem ideally suited for a multitouch input device rather than conventional mouse navigation.

A great example of one feature in particular is Stacks... Stacks is really a resurrection of Piles, a project that began in the early 1990's which outlined the ability to expand stacks of documents to see their contents, be able to select documents in the expanded view, and then have them collapse back into a stack on mouse-off. Piles was specifically targeted at use in mobile computing, e.g. Newton/eMate. However, the Newton project was killed and then Piles laid dormant for more than ten years though patents existed off of which they are now capitalizing.

Piles, Coverflow, Spaces, Time Machine, etc. look EXTREMELY suited for multitouch in which navigation through three dimensions/axes can be extraordinarily intuitive and far easier than with a mouse.

Multitouch is, in my opinion, the mother of "killer apps"... bound to redefine the graphical user interface in the most significant way since the introduction of the Macintosh. Part of the challenge that drives the need for multitouch is the growth of the desktop... when you had maybe 5-6 personal folders, and maybe 100 files, conventional mouse and keyboard navigation were easy... but the mushrooming of this scenario to hundreds of folders and tens of thousands of files is exactly what prompted features like Spotlight.

The current standard user interface is no longer doing the trick for quick and simple navigation through your mess of content. That is where Multitouch can fly... by putting you directly in contact with the content of your desktop, you can navigate through data in three dimensions very quickly, as intuitively as you would move around real objects in real space (thanks to some ingenious little "physics" quirks ... e.g. "rubberbanding", variable scroll momentum dictated by the force and speed of the gesture, etc.) and employ simpler "gesturing" that will execute multiple commands in one intuitive handstroke, instead of a series of clicks and keystrokes... thereby greatly reducing the time it takes you to find what you're looking for. Simpler commands executing more complex instructions = efficiency gain.

Note that insiders say that iPhone's forthcoming file management system will be like Leopard's... with Coverflow and probably Stacks... and even now nowhere to be found is there a single traditional finder with nested folders, a command line prompt, or, most notably... not a single clunky series of nested dropdown menus.

These design factors are not merely an "accident"... they're reworking the whole concept toward a better design.

Furthermore, I think that AppleTV, that thing Steve Jobs calls a "hobby" is a project that while not quite ready for "prime time" is acting as a testbed for some later plans they have...

Back when Jobs came on board, he started the concept of the "digital hub"... First there were applications that turned the computer not into the central focus of your lifestyle, but the digital hub to which other lifestyle devices would connect and find purpose... i.e. iPhoto, iTunes, iDVD, iMovie, etc.

Then iPod was introduced... Apple takes the digital hub one step further by introducing one of the most significant appliances to be part of that ecosystem.

Now iPhone and AppleTV are introducing degrees of technological convergence that take the digital hub concept to new dimensions... the LAN and WAN. AppleTV bridges your LAN with your home entertainment. iPhone bridges you with the world. And it's possible iPhone may even end up having the ability (through mere software updates) to act as a Coverflow Remote, giving you the ability to navigate and control AppleTV and its LAN constituents, and queue up selections for viewing on your home entertainment system via AppleTV.

What is the next step in branching out the digital hub? LAN-WAN interconnectivity. Bridging your home network with you on the go in a more elegant manner than clunky VPN software or SSH, remote access, etc. and doing so without being tethered to 802.11 wi-fi or a landline.

Imagine driving the kids to see Grandma and you forgot to load their favorite movie on our iPhone... no problem. The car's built-in navigation/entertainment console happens to be a Mobile Mac with 4G/WiMax and multiple multitouch interfaces in the dash and headrests... Kids punch up the user-friendly touchscreen in the headrest, it communicates over a wireless carrier to your LAN, talks to some AppleTV-like device on the network which locates the file on whichever computer it might be stored on, and streams the video back to the car.

This is the kind of technological convergence that makes the "computing" part of computers so transparent... the kind of elegance Apple is shooting for... and if I can think of it it's not hard to imagine that their much more intelligent product people are probably already testing prototypes as we speak.


AWESOME post. I bow in your general direction.

.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #47 of 104
The article is informative, but the headline is baiting. Pure and simple.
post #48 of 104
Indeed, Snowdog74's post is terrific and thoughtful.
post #49 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by syklee26 View Post

they have been hit and miss but mostly hit recently.

"mostly hit"? Can you name three things that they got right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by wally007 View Post

Actually they've done very well lately. Especially with Leopard release when everybody AND APPLE denied reports that Leopard is delayed , digitimes stood by their reports and said October release.

That is only one of two examples that I am aware of that they got anything right, ever. I don't even remember what the other example was.

They were right on the fact and duration of the Leopard delay, but absolutely, totally wrong on the reason. Digitimes said Apple was delaying because of Vista compatibility issues, which turned out to be false because Boot Camp was released a few days later with Vista support, shooting down that reason. Apple eventually acknowledged a delay, but BootCamp was not the likely reason. Apple claimed that it was because they needed a set of key Mac OS X engineers to work on the iPhone so that it ships on time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Louzer View Post

What? Apple doesn't care about sales seasons. That's why they always time their updates to the consumer/education lines to be after all the schools have spent their money (still waiting for that new iMac, probably september). It seems like apple sees it as a gimick, or a sales 'incentive', to put out product in that time frame. They have this ideal their stuff doesn't need a 'reason' to buy it, you'll buy it regardless.

Let's separate the computer and iPod divisions. Their computer division doesn't seem to be very seasonal at all, some ripples, but not much. In contrast, their iPod releases and sales are very seasonal, and for the last three years, they have timed the updates to their iPods to be ahead of the holiday season, which has always been the time of the year when they sell the most by a significant margin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PBG4 Dude View Post

I don't think an iPod will have a Hard drive because it would take too long to boot up. The iPhone takes 5-10 seconds to boot and that's all solid state. It would take much longer on a slow spinning 1.8" HDD.

Even the fast solid state memory is faster, but not _that_ much faster than a 1.8" hard drive. I think it might add a few more seconds, double the time, at most.
post #50 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

"mostly hit"? Can you name three things that they got right?

That is only one of two examples that I am aware of that they got anything right, ever. I don't even remember what the other example was.

They were right on the fact and duration of the Leopard delay, but absolutely, totally wrong on the reason. Digitimes said Apple was delaying because of Vista compatibility issues, which turned out to be false because Boot Camp was released a few days later with Vista support, shooting down that reason.

I tend to agree with Jeff's comments. ("Even a broken clock is right twice a day.")

Having said that,
1. I fully expect an iPod revision by Oct 31 (figured this prior to Digitimes article)
2. the quotes attributed to DigiTimes are not exactly detailed. How much leeway will be given these quotes after the next iPod is released?

Quote:
Apple is preparing to launch a next-generation video iPod in August that features a touch-screen panel similar to the iPhone, according to DigiTimes.

"The company noted that its touch screen panels will be used with customers' own software and ICs."

"Similar" and "the customer's own software" leave a lot of room for interpretation.
post #51 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by eAi View Post

I'd say early September is more likely based on past experience... October might be too late - they don't want to release too close to the "holiday season" or they'll have massive stock shortages... September is a good compromise - it gives people enough time to buy them, wave them around to their friends and for their friends to get it on their wish lists

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgkwho View Post

No way- September is iPod month. Mark my words: the 11th the new lineup will arrive based on the previous two years' announcements.

5Gen introduced 12 October 2005
5.5Gen introduced 12 September 2006
1Gen Nano introduced 7 September 2005
2Gen Nano introduced 12 September 2006

September's not a bad guess, but I think that Apple will wait (supposing that the iPod will have a touch interface). This gives more time for the iPhone to be king. As long as the 6Gen iPod is introduced by Black Friday, Apple will hit the Christmas season: that's all that matters. Releasing the 6Gen iPod in September is unimportant, but letting the iPhone have it's time in the limelight is important: you do the math.
post #52 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by stompy View Post

Having said that,
1. I fully expect an iPod revision by Oct 31 (figured this prior to Digitimes article)

agreed.
post #53 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowdog74 View Post

Piles, Coverflow, Spaces, Time Machine, etc. look EXTREMELY suited for multitouch in which navigation through three dimensions/axes can be extraordinarily intuitive and far easier than with a mouse.

I just day-dreamt for like 10 minutes about "flicking through time" via multitouch-friendly TimeMachine. Thanks for that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowdog74 View Post

Multitouch is, in my opinion, the mother of "killer apps"... bound to redefine the graphical user interface in the most significant way since the introduction of the Macintosh. [...]

I couldn't agree more. I imagine a more ideal desktop being more like the iPhone's. The current dock/desktop becomes a grid of icon gems. The "Finder" gem will bring you to an iTunes-a-la-iPhone playlist-style list that lets you flick through and browse folders just as you would albums or playlists. Suddenly the iTunesation of the Leopard Finder makes a lot more sense to me...

I'm excited about the future of computing! The landscape is finally changing after 20 years of GUI stagnation.

The best part is that I don't see a future for Microsoft. I can only forsee their touchable GUI being unbearably complicated and cluttered. Good riddance.

-Clive
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
post #54 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post



The Leopard delay was the only thing they "predicted" correctly. Apple then said IN RESPONSE to the DigiTimes report that it would not be delayed. A week or two later, they retracted that statement and officially announced the October roll-out date for Leopard.

Why would Apple deny the delay if they were just going to confirm it two weeks later? That makes no sense and only makes them look stupid. If Apple had decided concretely that they were going to push back until October they would have said something to the effect of, "We always plan to hit our target dates but occasionally we take more time than previously thought to get our projects perfected. We'll keep you informed if we decide to do this regarding Leopard."

They didn't though. They flat out denied it. That leads me to think that they had no concrete plans to delay. There was no "DigiTimes standing their ground." They may have heard a rumor, bit at it, like they always do, and this time they actually happened to be right.

If you report every rumor you hear, eventually you will be right.

-Clive

They had NO plans to delay it ? No seriously , are you high ? Have you ever even read about what it takes to pull of something as big as Operating System , much less been through it ? Timelines are set months ahead , and are checked on at least once a week to see the status. So this " they didnt know " just doesnt fly.

There's boat load of possible reasons why they didnt confirm the rumor. Now i dont remeber who denied the rumor but if it wasnt Jobs , then it's most likely that THAT person didnt even know.
post #55 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by desarc View Post

since the R&D is done, and the cost of components goes down constantly, why not use the same components that you're already manufacturing? what's the total component price of the iPhone in today's dollars? $220?

swap the 8 gigs of flash for an 80 gig HDD and charge $399? [i don't know the component cost for 80gig drives vs. 8gigs of flash...]

Considering that the current iPod with 30 GB is priced the same as an 8 GB nano and the 80 GB is priced at $349, somehow I doubt that a hard drive will drive up the cost of a prospective multi-touch iPod with HDD. Disk storage will cost about 5x, maybe 8x, less than flash storage. Ie, for the cost of 8 GB of flash, Apple can probably get a 40 to 60 GB drive.

The primary reason for no HDD on the iPhone appears to be durability, power consumption, and size. That's a tough decision since even a 30 GB drive is small for an "iPod" video player as capable as the iPhone.

Like in the Future Hardware thread, an iPod with OS-X is going to be a stripped down as possible iPhone, but with an HDD. No cellular radio, no WiFi, and maybe even no Bluetooth. Probably no speaker (both of them), no microphone, and probably no camera. This just makes more room for the HDD and the battery. Apple has to be very careful about having conflicting price points too.
post #56 of 104
I think the new iPod video will be a full-screen model with switchable Multi-Touch or Click Wheel functionality that will have the same physical length, width and depth of the current iPod 5.5G 80 GB model (this to maintain compatibility with current iPod docks). It will store either 60 GB or 100 GB of data, and will NOT offer WiFi or Internet capabilities.
post #57 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowdog74 View Post

Apple has hired on additional engineers in some key areas that hint at the multitouch technology becoming the ubiquitous next-gen interface in most of their products.

First there's the addition of panel engineers outside of the iPhone team whose job it will be to work on larger multitouch surfaces. Then there's what appears to be the formation of a "Mobile Mac" business unit within Apple, and a Manager of Mobile Mac Architecture, which is decidedly aimed at developing a product line of portable computing/communications platforms.

Also is the fact that Apple acquired Fingerworks, a company that developed multitouch interfaces... In order for Apple to justify this acquisition, it has got to be for more than a narrow purpose...e.g. iPhone product line only.

Great post! Some recent patents also point in this direction: the multi-touch mouse, and other patents regarding multi-touch features in track-pads.
post #58 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by city View Post

I am looking foward to a very small full featured computer tablet and maybe a one a little bigger too.

Hopefully it would also act as an eBook Reader with eBooks sold through iTunes.
post #59 of 104
And Bluetooth.

I see a future iPod with the same "design factor" as the iPhone but with a different objective.

Apple will still have to sell iPods with small screens, for those who are more interested in music (and don't care about the size of the screen).

Since Video is becoming ubiquitous, I envisage a "video iPod" along the "music iPod" line.

A video iPod has to have Wi-Fi, to surf the net where possible, but also to make it flexible for future applications. In particular I would see some sort of "auto-sync" when you come home, or a ".Mac" integration of some sort. And maybe some "social interaction" through Wi-Fi. Examples might be: purchase music on the go (where Wi-Fi is available), iChat and else.

More realistically however, these features will not be implemented because Wi-Fi is so ubiquious that such a device would really cannibalize iPhone sales.

Another thing the new "video iPod" could do is have more apps like the "Nike Plus" application, games, and other things you might want to use on the go.

In my opinion there are several reasons why a new "video iPod" should have Wi-Fi capablities. I just hope that Apple doesn't get too scared by the current increase of people hacking the devices to the point they decide to strip some capabilites just in order to avoid them being used for non intended purposes (the most significant, which btw I think will come as soon as the iPhone has been fully hacked, of which is VoIP).

Touch screen interface seems really the way to go. Think about the fact that the "average" hand has 5 buttons (unlike the mouse). How many combinations could one implement to allow the execution of several tasks in no time? We would have to learn how to interact with computers again, but that is not a problem, since it would all become much more intuitive.

iPod with NAND or with HD?
Why not a combination of both? OSX loads via NAND (instant boot-up), together with the most used apps or the most recently used content (the latest movie I was in the middle of watching before I turned it off) and the rest from the HD.
post #60 of 104
I'd say that a widescreen/touchscreen iPod is pretty much a given. Put it another way, it's unthinkable that Apple would persist with the existing iPod form factor now that the iPhone is out.

In more detail:
  • 100GB HD
  • no camera
  • no GPS
  • hopefully WiFi

Does the WiFi threaten to cannibalise the iPhone? I don't think so.

Expect to see tight iTunes store integration: Apple just *loves* that little revenue stream...
post #61 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by boy_analog View Post

I'd say that a widescreen/touchscreen iPod is pretty much a given. Put it another way, it's unthinkable that Apple would persist with the existing iPod form factor now that the iPhone is out.

In more detail:
  • 100GB HD
  • no camera
  • no GPS
  • hopefully WiFi

Does the WiFi threaten to cannibalise the iPhone? I don't think so.

Expect to see tight iTunes store integration: Apple just *loves* that little revenue stream...

I agree with you. I think there's a good chance of it having Wifi. I just hope it can wirelessly sync.
post #62 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBG4 Dude View Post

I don't think an iPod will have a Hard drive because it would take too long to boot up. The iPhone takes 5-10 seconds to boot and that's all solid state. It would take much longer on a slow spinning 1.8" HDD.

The iPod can sleep. It doesn't have to boot every time you turn it on.
post #63 of 104
Snowdog74, you truly made my day

1/ Multi touch allready made its way into the current Macbook series. Hopefully the Swiping, Pinching and Scrolling gestures will soon become part of everyone's Macbook life.

2/ The iPhone's current interface is amazing. It's the end of the scroll bar and the cursor!
post #64 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

Hopefully it would also act as an eBook Reader with eBooks sold through iTunes.

ebook reader +++
post #65 of 104
I still contend that the 6G video iPod will NOT have either WiFi or Bluetooth connectivity--it will be a strictly media player that can connect to an Apple TV device through an iPod dock that has the standard iPod data connector; the dock can connect to the AirPort Extreme device so it can stream media to the Apple TV.

Why no built-in WiFi or Bluetooth? The reason is simple: it prevents hackers from accessing the iPod through a wireless connection and possibly damaging the player.
post #66 of 104
Although its not an apple product, people should check out the Nokia n800. It seems like it fulfills the desires of a lot of people in this thread.

The Nokia n800 review at spicey gadget
post #67 of 104
So will this thing play videos larger than the iPhone does? Because I don't like how squished up videos are on the iPhone. Can't they make the video play completely full screen??
post #68 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by SactoMan01 View Post

Why no built-in WiFi or Bluetooth? The reason is simple: it prevents hackers from accessing the iPod through a wireless connection and possibly damaging the player.

I've never seen a case where remote access damages hardware.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thehellgate911 View Post

So will this thing play videos larger than the iPhone does? Because I don't like how squished up videos are on the iPhone. Can't they make the video play completely full screen??

The demo videos suggest tapping (or double tapping?) the screen during playback to change the video play mode, switching between letterbox or full screen mode.
post #69 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I've never seen a case where remote access damages hardware.



The demo videos suggest tapping (or double tapping?) the screen during playback to change the video play mode, switching between letterbox or full screen mode.

On the iPhone??? Really? I'll have to check that out.

Edit: I just watched a demo video, and that isn't what I want. I want the video to go all the way from the left side to the right side of the device, without all the black space on each side. I will ALWAYS watch videos in their original theatrical aspect ratio, so the "fullscreen" thing isn't what I want. I just want more screen real estate that's ACTUALLY screen.
post #70 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daffy_Duck View Post

I agree with you. I think there's a good chance of it having Wifi. I just hope it can wirelessly sync.

I don't think you really understand the consequences of wireless sync. It will take battery power and operate at 1/10th the speed of a USB 2 connection. Using the cable charges and syncs at the best speed. There are interesting ideas for wireless in iPods, but I don't think syncing is one of them.
post #71 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by thehellgate911 View Post

On the iPhone??? Really? I'll have to check that out.

Edit: I just watched a demo video, and that isn't what I want. I want the video to go all the way from the left side to the right side of the device, without all the black space on each side. I will ALWAYS watch videos in their original theatrical aspect ratio, so the "fullscreen" thing isn't what I want. I just want more screen real estate that's ACTUALLY screen.

The video apple-iphone-welcome show a sample video of the widescreen video of Cars being fit to the left and right edge of the screen, in what appears to be the original aspect ratio. The actual audio is like this: "you can double tap to see the movie in its theatrical aspect ratio, if you want to zoom in at full screen, double tap again".
post #72 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

The video apple-iphone-welcome show a sample video of the widescreen video of Cars being fit to the left and right edge of the screen, in what appears to be the original aspect ratio. The actual audio is like this: "you can double tap to see the movie in its theatrical aspect ratio, if you want to zoom in at full screen, double tap again".

Yes. I know! What i'm talking about is having the screen COVER THE ENTIRE FACE OF THE DEVICE. So that they'll be about 2 millimeters of edge on each side of the screen, and the video will be covering one entire side of the device. The screen is not as big as i'd like it to be. That's all i'm saying.
post #73 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by thehellgate911 View Post

Yes. I know! What i'm talking about is having the screen COVER THE ENTIRE FACE OF THE DEVICE. So that they'll be about 2 millimeters of edge on each side of the screen, and the video will be covering one entire side of the device. The screen is not as big as i'd like it to be. That's all i'm saying.

OK then. Your original wording suggested that the video was distorted or something like that. For the iPone, It would be nice to have a bigger screen, but I don't know if it's realistic, given that there needs to be more room than that for the mic and the earpiece. On an iPod without those things, then maybe, but I don't know if there are screens that size and shape.
post #74 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

OK then. Your original wording suggested that the video was distorted or something like that. For the iPone, It would be nice to have a bigger screen, but I don't know if it's realistic, given that there needs to be more room than that for the mic and the earpiece. On an iPod without those things, then maybe, but I don't know if there are screens that size and shape.

Well, the iPod is now a complete media player, and it SHOULD be better at playing movies than the iPhone is.

I think the new widescreen ipod will have a 4" screen.
post #75 of 104
Nice but I'll see believe it when I see it, my 4 GB 1st died of unknown causes, so I replaced it with a 2nd gen Nano. Since my itunes account got bigger over the years I opted to upgrade to the 30GB Video last week but knew an improved verison was not that far around the bend.
You are coming to a sad realization, cancel or allow?
Reply
You are coming to a sad realization, cancel or allow?
Reply
post #76 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I don't think you really understand the consequences of wireless sync. It will take battery power and operate at 1/10th the speed of a USB 2 connection. Using the cable charges and syncs at the best speed. There are interesting ideas for wireless in iPods, but I don't think syncing is one of them.

Yes, of course anything wireless will drain the battery.

The speed is not such a big issue though because all I would have to do is bring the iPod into wireless range of my computer. I can even leave it in my bag and it's updated and ready to go to work with me the next morning. When I have to plug it in, I'm sitting there waiting for it so I want it to be as fast as possible. I know my usage doesn't match everyone elses but I usually charge it at work and sync it at home.
post #77 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by thehellgate911 View Post

Well, the iPod is now a complete media player, and it SHOULD be better at playing movies than the iPhone is.

I think the new widescreen ipod will have a 4" screen.

It's probably economically advantageous for Apple to use the same 3.5" screen from the iPhone. All the same parts. It'll be interesting to see if the keep it iPhone planform area or iPod planform area too.
post #78 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by THT View Post

It's probably economically advantageous for Apple to use the same 3.5" screen from the iPhone. All the same parts. It'll be interesting to see if the keep it iPhone planform area or iPod planform area too.

That would suck really badly if the iPod keeps the 3.5" screen. I want a bigger screen damn it!!!
post #79 of 104
well. i think a touch function is useless, apple should updater more in iPod screen.them i can make full use off LINK REMOVED DO NOT SPAM THIS SOFTWARE HERE for iPod
post #80 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squall58 View Post

well. i think a touch function is useless, apple should updater more in iPod screen.them i can make full use of *SNIP URL*

Can you please stop link spamming?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Multi-touch video iPods to arrive in August - report