Last-minute iPod rumors reaffirm cameras for touch, nano

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014
Though Apple is especially tight-lipped for its annual iPod event set for Wednesday, John Gruber has shared what little he has been told will be unveiled by the hardware maker in just hours.



Calling them "sure thing bets," the Daring Fireball blogger said that both the iPod nano and iPod touch will receive cameras. He believes the new iPod touch will have the same RAM and processor speed as the iPhone 3GS, and the new media player will sell in capacities of 16GB, 32GB and 64GB at prices of $199, $299 and $399, respectively. He also said that the hard drive-based iPod classic will remain, likely with a 160GB capacity for $249.



Gruber admitted that he has heard "very little" prior to Wednesday's event in San Francisco, reaffirming reports that a veil of secrecy returned when co-founder Steve Jobs returned to work at Apple. And all of what he's confirmed, including the addition of cameras to the iPod touch and iPod nano, was known months ago.



Beyond the information Gruber is confident with, he also offers a number of unverified rumors and personal speculation. Among them:



Rumors that the new iPod nano will have a "top-secret new material/treatment" on its exterior, and will include an FM tuner.



A prediction that the iPod shuffle will be redesigned once again, as Gruber believes the no-button model has been a flop.



Because iTunes is run on both Windows and Mac, and most iTunes users are on Windows, it would not make much sense for Apple to write iTunes 9 in Cocoa for 64-bit (it is currently a 32-bit Carbon application). Instead, Gruber predicts that iTunes will be rewritten using WebKit, the same browser engine used in Safari, to allow the application to be developed simultaneously for both Windows and Mac.



Rumors of Apple's "Cocktail" offering, designed to incentivize sales of full albums, have existed for months. Gruber believes that this, too, will be rendered in WebKit. "My guess is that Cocktail is going to be like a sort of next-generation Dashboard."



While analysts have engaged in a will he or won't he debate on whether Jobs will appear Wednesday, Gruber does not believe he'll be on stage.

Apple's keynote is scheduled for 10 a.m. Pacific, 1 p.m. Eastern on Wednesday. AppleInsider will have full coverage and analysis of the event.

«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 69
    I think it is supposed be at 1 pm eastern, otherwise i'll stay up
  • Reply 2 of 69
    brucepbrucep Posts: 2,823member
    Well a 3.5to 5 mega pixel anything pod like is fine



    and a MIFI ipod of any stripe is also fine



    and a ipod with a beatle logo on the outside and filled with the whole beatle collection on the inside would fine too





    >>>>>>>>>>



    When I get to the bottom I go back to the top of the slide

    Where I stop and I turn and I go for a ride

    Till I get to the bottom and I see you again.

    Do you, don't you want me to love you.

    I'm coming down fast but I'm miles above you.

    Tell me tell me tell me come on tell me the answer.
  • Reply 3 of 69
    satchmosatchmo Posts: 2,699member
    I wonder if the cameras in both iPod Touch and Nano will be video capable.

    One would think so for the Touch...but the Nano's display may be just too small.
  • Reply 4 of 69
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chriskeo View Post


    I think it is supposed be at 1 pm eastern, otherwise i'll stay up



    Yep.. 1PM out our way... means I can sleep in and still not miss... whatever it is they plan on underwhelming** us with tomorrow.. Fact is, nearly every Apple event leaves more than a fair share of us jaded and battlescsarred veterans are left typing: "Ummm okay, Steve actually held a special EVENT for THAT?!!"



    **BTW dibs on being the first to claim the event as totally underwhelming!



    Dave
  • Reply 5 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Because iTunes is run on both Windows and Mac, and most iTunes users are on Windows, it would not make much sense for Apple to write iTunes 9 in Cocoa for 64-bit (it is currently a 32-bit Carbon application). Instead, Gruber predicts that iTunes will be rewritten using WebKit, the same browser engine used in Safari, to allow the application to be developed simultaneously for both Windows and Mac.



    I highly doubt that iTunes 9 will be rewritten using Webkit. It simply doesn't make any sense. Webkit is a web rendering engine and writing iTunes using Webkit would essentially make it a "Web App" that uses javascript, html and css.



    Windows users are already complaining how iTunes is slow and bloated on Windows, javascript simply wouldn't cut it to manage 10,000+ songs in a library.



    Safari wasn't ported to Windows using Webkit. It was Webkit itself that was ported to Windows, along with Core Graphics and Core Foundation, with some of the Cocoa API's, to enable Apple to easily port Safari using pretty much the same code-base as the Mac OS X version.



    Anyone remembers "Yellow Box for Windows" from the Rhapsody days?



    Apple could indeed use the same method used with Safari to port a Cocoa version of iTunes.
  • Reply 6 of 69
    al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by VL-Tone View Post


    I highly doubt that iTunes 9 will be rewritten using Webkit. It simply doesn't make any sense. Webkit is a web rendering engine and writing iTunes using Webkit would essentially make it a "Web App" that uses javascript, html and css.



    Windows users are already complaining how iTunes is slow and bloated on Windows, javascript simply wouldn't cut it to manage 10,000+ songs in a library.



    Safari wasn't ported to Windows using Webkit. It was Webkit itself that was ported to Windows, along with Core Graphics and Core Foundation, with some of the Cocoa API's, to enable Apple to easily port Safari using pretty much the same code-base as the Mac OS X version.



    Anyone remembers "Yellow Box for Windows" from the Rhapsody days?



    Apple could indeed use the same method used with Safari to port a Cocoa version of iTunes.



    itunes is already mostly a web app. every time you click somewhere it calls to an apple server somewhere. it just uses the same interface as it did 10 years ago.
  • Reply 7 of 69
    Who cares about FM radio? The iPod killed it 8 years ago. The whole point of an iPod is because radio plays crap and has to many commercials.



    As for the shuffle, it's true, the no button idea was a flop. I work at a place and we still sell the 2nd gen shuffle because no one wants the new one.
  • Reply 8 of 69
    Nice ad for yourself. HandBreak does the same thing for FREE!!!
  • Reply 9 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post


    itunes is already mostly a web app. every time you click somewhere it calls to an apple server somewhere. it just uses the same interface as it did 10 years ago.



    iTunes works very well to manage a media library even when you're not connected to the internet.



    You must be talking about the iTunes Store.



    Sure the store part could be ported to WebKit, I don't see any major problems with that. I'm talking about the rest of iTunes, namely the media management part. As I said, Javascript simply wouldn't cut it when it comes to sorting/managing 10,000+ songs and dealing with all the meta-data of a large library.



    Even with a small library, on an old/cheap computer the interface would be slow as molasses if it was running entirely in WebKit.
  • Reply 10 of 69
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Howard KKN View Post


    Make iPod like a half of iPhone. Is it really need to attach a camera? I don't think so.

    Give me one more hand, although I have two yet.



    Whatever, this tool is very useful for iPod users.



    'Accelerate DVD to iPod Converter'...



    Go somewhere else if you want to spam people. I reported this post and I hope they delete it.
  • Reply 11 of 69
    al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by VL-Tone View Post


    iTunes works very well to manage a media library even when you're not connected to the internet.



    You must be talking about the iTunes Store.



    Sure the store part could be ported to WebKit, I don't see any major problems with that. I'm talking about the rest of iTunes, namely the media management part. As I said, Javascript simply wouldn't cut it when it comes to sorting/managing 10,000+ songs and dealing with all the meta-data of a large library.



    Even with a small library, on an old/cheap computer the interface would be slow as molasses if it was running entirely in WebKit.







    I think the rest is just a bunch of XML files that tell it where the files are on the file system and what is in which playlists. They could probably use a lite version of mysql and get better performance than XML files
  • Reply 12 of 69
    al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member
    Pita editing posts on iPhone



    I'll be shocked if apple goes for oracle lite instead of mysql. And really shocked if they use SQL 2008
  • Reply 13 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jawporta View Post


    Who cares about FM radio? The iPod killed it 8 years ago. The whole point of an iPod is because radio plays crap and has to many commercials.



    Maybe, but a Nano or Shuffle with an FM radio would be awesome (but unlikely). I go to the gym with my iPod, and often see something on one of the overhead TV's that I'd like to tune into!
  • Reply 14 of 69
    wake me when the tablet arrives. tomorrow is a non-event. sure it'll do something to boost holiday sales and put a blip on the stock ticker, but is this really news? cameras? puh-leeeez.
  • Reply 15 of 69
    How about adding the GPS to the Touch? That seems like a no-brainer that would make it a lot more useful for the un-connected world.



    And... they are ready to announce the Tablet... just not ship it...
  • Reply 16 of 69
    wigginwiggin Posts: 2,258member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    A prediction that the iPod shuffle will be redesigned once again, as Gruber believes the no-button model has been a flop.



    The fat nano, Leopard's iCal "bubble", Firewire on the 13" laptop, matte screens, and the buttonless shuffle... On the one hand it is nice to see an Apple willing to correct their obvious design mis-steps and not cling to bad decisions (ie, the hockey puck mouse). But on the other hand it's a little worrisome that they made those mistakes in the first place as they were clearly poor design choices from the beginning.



    Now if they would get to work correcting the most glaring design mistake with the AppleTV (can't play the content I already own, ie, an optical drive) it might not be too late to save it.
  • Reply 17 of 69
    I already have a great camera so don't need another one on the iTouch that I have to pay for again. Would like the FM tuner as there are times I like the radio (getting ready in the morning when the Song Teaser comes on I know I should already be at the door).



    I would like GPS instead of the camera.



    Not sure what else they can add to it. Like a new version of Excel...how many features go completely unused but, are added to say there are new features..



    While I will like to see how the presention goes tomorrow don't see getting to excited for an iTouch with a camera. Now if it was an X-ray Camera that would be cool...
  • Reply 18 of 69
    I agree that the iPod touch will get the 3GS treatment with faster processor and camera with video and that it'll go to 64GB. I also agree the iPod classic will carry on at least one more time, but I'm going to go with it dropping in prices and sticking to 120GB to get replaced by next year's 128GB iPod touch.



    shuffle redesign this soon? I think not. I think it's a typical response of those that don't understand it. What are they going to do, put the buttons back and say "we've now figured out how to get buttons on the smaller device"? No. Price drop, yes.



    I agree with VL-Tone that Safari for Windows proves you don't need to use Carbon to have a Windows port of a 64 bit Mac app. We should see a Cocoa iTunes sporting some new feature as a result. And doesn't iTunes already use WebKit for the store rendering?



    Cocktail? Don't know, but I do hope that whatever they do that they'd let me do it to the albums I already have.
  • Reply 19 of 69
    mpantonempantone Posts: 1,337member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BeyondYourFrontDoor View Post


    How about adding the GPS to the Touch? That seems like a no-brainer that would make it a lot more useful for the un-connected world.



    The usefulness of a GPS connection without an always-on Internet connection is limited. After all, what good is knowing what coordinates you're at if you can't see them on a map, just a blank grid?



    As to people wanting the GPS more than the camera, that makes no sense. Digital cameras far outsell personal GPS devices. The iPhone is basically the number one "camera" on Flickr. Far more people want to take pictures or record video of stuff going around them than people who need GPS or "front-facing cameras for video conferencing."



    Apple generally does not pre-announce new products. The iPhone was an exception because the FCC must approve new devices and the application would have been noticed by others. The tablet would not really benefit from an early unveiling, plus that's really the antithesis of highly-secretive Apple (unreleased products are walked through the company hallways under black cloth).



    And the iPod classic is dead.
  • Reply 20 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mpantone View Post


    And the iPod classic is dead.



    I don't want to read too much into the announcement, but the graphic they're using would seem to be an iPod classic. The shape looks like it, and while that could be a Touch, there's no microphone/volume control clicker on the earbuds.



    ...just my thoughts.
Sign In or Register to comment.