There is going to be no device called DVD or TV ipod. But, there is some truth about it. The 4th generation ipod may have video out. So, it may connect to your tv to look at your stored photos.
Well given the fact that it took the Mac community at large about 10 minutes after the introduction of the first iPod to start speculating about a video iPod (with all kinds of different feature sets) - the rumor has been around for quite a long time - as to the truth of the device - yea I'm sure it'll happen sometime.
The issues are:
Steve's comments about video being a foreground activity (anti-vPod)
Color screens taking up way more battery life (anti-vPod)
Tiny screens suck for video (anti-vPod)
One way around it:
Leave the screen the way it is
Add a method for video out
Photos / Video are played ONLY via the video out
That way no change in the screen size or color and while additional battery usage might be an issue it wouldn't be as bad as it would be with a color screen.
The down side to this:
- Not exactly what people here would like to see - color screens are sexy
- Hooking it up to a TV could still be annoying since most TVs still have all of their connectors in the back and TVs vary ALOT as to what connector types they do have. Some have coax only some also include composite others add svideo other still add component and in europe they have SCART (or something like that - IIRC) - oh and I haven't even got into the differences with HDTV sets both in the US and overseas. Add it all up and the choices and selection of video connectors are truly dizzying. - This could be a major hurdle.
In short some people will most assuredly be pissed that their TV isn't supported... and they will ALL find their way to one or more Mac related forums to bitch about it. Especially those who aren't even in the market or have the cash for a new 'vPod' in the first place - if the past is any indication of the future those users (who can't afford it / aren't in the market for it) will be the MOST vocal about it not working on their TV.
it would be cool for Apple to release a photo supporting ipod with a color screen...But, as steve says, people don't buy iPods for video, or photos, they buy them for music...I think that they should just make a color iPod, everything the same besides the screen, and battery...
If this is true, how come that current cell phones feature standby-times of approx. a week in iPod mini-size enclosures and with a color screen?
the ipod probably does last a week in standby mode (i.e 'sleep' mode). you have to understand too that, when the ipod is playing, its using a hard drive to sift through thousands of songs. on a cell phone you have flash memory and just about nothing on it.
If this is true, how come that current cell phones feature standby-times of approx. a week in iPod mini-size enclosures and with a color screen?
Because the cellphone doesn't have the screen on all the time (that is why it is standby mode). And who ever is lasting a week doesn't use the standard battery. I have a color screen phone, and I have to charage it every 4-5 days. My old non-color screen phone could go way longer without charges.
So basicly figure that the iPod, with a color screen, would probably last half as long for playback.
Because the cellphone doesn't have the screen on all the time (that is why it is standby mode).
If you are referring to background light, this is off most of the time, true. But this also applies to the iPod screen. The display proper is on on the cell phone, because it displays the status screen.
Color LCDs have 3x as many transistors as monochrome displays, but the transistor size is 3x smaller. Is anyone here able to tell from a position of knowledge (as opposed to guesswork) if this cancels out each other (guess: yes)?
Do color LCDs need a stronger background light because of the color filters (guess: yes). And what about transflexive diplays (guess: need less power)?
Colour screens do use more battery power. Since there are 4 colours bits per pixel, this requires more information to be transferred from the processor to electric 'grid' as you were, that decides which pixels are 'on' and which are 'off'. The backlight however uses the most power by far, and it needs to be more crisp and 'white' than a monochrome display's.
What apple may well do is use Light Emitting Polymer Displays (LEP) in their new ipods as these are currently becoming used in digital cameras, and are far more energy efficient (no backlighting as the screen itself emmits light). There are a few other options around as well - most of which are still in the developement stage though.
New battery developements are constantly being made. Without going into technicalities, I am sure that improved versions that give 8h wih a colour screen etc will emerge soon.
Since apple has made such a global move with iTunes and iPod and now posting playlists on the net, this would suggest that they intend to implement as simple a manner of showing off your pictures via the iPod (on the screen and/or through a connection to TV) and also easily publishing/printing albums on the web. Simplicity is the key. The videoPod killer, whoever is making it (can't remember), will be too complicated, apple don't do complicated. Much like I bought a Sony Ericsson T68i as it had 'everything' at the time... 2 months and I changed to Nokia, simpler, less gadgetry, looked good => better (was more expensive though, but I didn't care).
Afterall, Apple has been working closely with Belkin who make the SD card attachment and other such things which would be useful with such an iPod.
With possible battery improvements/cost willing, bluetooth could be built-in to the device. For image transfer (from mobile phones predominantly) and more importantly, the iPod would cut out if someone called you on your phone or you could use the iPod as a handsfree for your phone. However I see this to be fairly unlikely as yet, maybe in the future....
I firmly believe the new layout of buttons will be the same as on the miniPods, allowing space for a larger display.
Obviously a larger HDD would be in order at this point too.
The price is anyones guess, but I suppose following the present 40gb wouldn't be out of order, perhaps a wee bit more at the start.
it's going to incorporate a 2" color LCD, and have .jpeg and .bmp support.
The interesting thing I noticed is the iRiver H300 is just a little bit bigger than the 3rd gen ipods but not by much at all
20 gig ipod = 4.1 x 2.4 x .52 @ 5.6 oz
20 gig iriver H300 = 4.1 x 2.45 x .9 @ 6.53 oz
It also has a battery life of up to 16hrs on it.
I'm sure Apple can and probably will go this route with something prettier and user-friendly. I just hope we get that reported battery life that the iRiver and every other brand out there brags about.
the specs are preliminary on this model of course, but I assume iRiver will wait and see if apple brings the 4th gen ipod out so it can compete with apple and steal sales
I'm curious as to why I would buy a device with a 2" color screen for playing music and looking at pics. Cell phones with built in cameras are a better option IMO. Screen size is roughly the same.
What I see, and mind you it's really funny, is the familiar Peecee way of competing here. The though from iRiver is "if I can somehow add some feature that the ipod doesn't have I can beat it" . This is not going to happen. How oftend are you walking down the street wanting to run through a bunch of pictures? People break out the pictures on special occaisions. Pictures are just not that important for the average person on a daily basis.
Video iPods are offered by those with no originality. They assume that video is the next logical step for portable devices but really fail to think about this deeper.
The real goal for video is to encompass the "magic" of the iPod in a video product for the home. No one has made the perfect solution yet. Apple probably won't try unless they know they can do it better than anyone else.
I would like a video iPod, but only if it had a color screen that was large enough to see anything. Also, I think it would need to be widescreen, since letterboxed movies on a standard 4:3 are smaller in size. What I was thinking would be the same form factor as the ipod but turned 90 degrees on it's side. The front being the entire screen and the buttons are touch screen virtual buttons.... or the buttons could be on the side of the ipod so as to not dirty up the screen.
Dumb because there is an underlying assumption that "after the audio there comes the video" as sure as "night follows day" - or as "TV follows radio".
This assumption is wrong. Because pocket video devices bring with them no market. Hey dood check out my 1984 video walkman...
1) No one wants to watch Pirates of the Carribean while jogging
2) No one will be watching Debbie Does Dallas in the office by the photocopier
3) No movie studio will be selling thumbnail format versions of Wizard of Oz to a non-existent market.
Those new PDAs with color screens are similar in form factor to the notional pocket video iPod. One of the first things people do is download and watch a movie on them. "Isn't this cool" they laugh. And having done it - they never do it again. Because people don't use pocket devices like this.
Yes, a color screen on an iPod might make it a marginally more desirable device. Yes, the ability to preview photos might result in another tick-box being ticked which if Apple are lucky, might translate into a couple of thousand extra sales.
And yes the ability to play a 1Gig VCD movie on the tiny screen might mean that security guards across the world can enjoy a guilty pleasure in pocket format.
But all these things are little significance. A better iPod would have more battery life. A better iPod would do a better job with bookmarks for long tracks. A better iPod would make music sound better.
An Apple device dedicated to recording, playing, storing & burning video material might be a product worth buying. Apple might decide to use the iPod brand to describe it - but making such a machine pocketable would be pointless and counter productive. A pocket toaster on the other hand....
But a question. Does anyone think Apple would simultaneously have two portable consumer devices - the iPod *and* a vPod?
While an iPod can't really be a vPod (form factor, battery life, functional purity etc), a vPod could be an iPod. It would have to play audio, and Apple would ensure that a simple interface was evolved for it.
iRiver is coming out with a new hd based mp3 player in Europe around May-June
[...]
The interesting thing I noticed is the iRiver H300 is just a little bit bigger than the 3rd gen ipods but not by much at all
20 gig ipod = 4.1 x 2.4 x .52 @ 5.6 oz
20 gig iriver H300 = 4.1 x 2.45 x .9 @ 6.53 oz
Well, except for being almost twice as thick.
For all that, they'd better be able to stick a big fat battery or two in there.
Quote:
I'm sure Apple can and probably will go this route with something prettier and user-friendly. I just hope we get that reported battery life that the iRiver and every other brand out there brags about.
Well, how big do you want the iPod to be? If it's going to remain relatively small and (especially) slim, that means a smaller battery, which means less battery life. The obvious way around that is to minimize the number of demands on the battery, which means that color screens, wireless connectivity, support for even more things that require the hard drive to spin up, etc., all have to be weighed against the cost in battery life and device size.
And, of course, I'd like to see how they got 16 hours. Turn off the screen and play the same song over and over again on mute?
A lot of people would like to use an iPod to store photos taken with their digital cameras. People have been clamoring for this in the digital photography forums but all they got was the ill-conceived Belkin adaptor. Not exactly an ideal soultion.
Comments
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=393
The issues are:
Steve's comments about video being a foreground activity (anti-vPod)
Color screens taking up way more battery life (anti-vPod)
Tiny screens suck for video (anti-vPod)
One way around it:
Leave the screen the way it is
Add a method for video out
Photos / Video are played ONLY via the video out
That way no change in the screen size or color and while additional battery usage might be an issue it wouldn't be as bad as it would be with a color screen.
The down side to this:
- Not exactly what people here would like to see - color screens are sexy
- Hooking it up to a TV could still be annoying since most TVs still have all of their connectors in the back and TVs vary ALOT as to what connector types they do have. Some have coax only some also include composite others add svideo other still add component and in europe they have SCART (or something like that - IIRC) - oh and I haven't even got into the differences with HDTV sets both in the US and overseas. Add it all up and the choices and selection of video connectors are truly dizzying. - This could be a major hurdle.
In short some people will most assuredly be pissed that their TV isn't supported... and they will ALL find their way to one or more Mac related forums to bitch about it. Especially those who aren't even in the market or have the cash for a new 'vPod' in the first place - if the past is any indication of the future those users (who can't afford it / aren't in the market for it) will be the MOST vocal about it not working on their TV.
Dave
Originally posted by DaveGee
Color screens taking up way more battery life (anti-vPod)
If this is true, how come that current cell phones feature standby-times of approx. a week in iPod mini-size enclosures and with a color screen?
Originally posted by Masterman
Hey guys...had heard about some TV or DVD iPod. Sounds crazy, but any truth to it?
-MM
The sensible form for a video iPod (if there were such a beast) would be one which fitted below a sensible sized screen (like a TV)
As an idea, pocket-video is as dumb as a bag of hammers.
Carni.
Originally posted by Smircle
If this is true, how come that current cell phones feature standby-times of approx. a week in iPod mini-size enclosures and with a color screen?
the ipod probably does last a week in standby mode (i.e 'sleep' mode). you have to understand too that, when the ipod is playing, its using a hard drive to sift through thousands of songs. on a cell phone you have flash memory and just about nothing on it.
Originally posted by Smircle
If this is true, how come that current cell phones feature standby-times of approx. a week in iPod mini-size enclosures and with a color screen?
Because the cellphone doesn't have the screen on all the time (that is why it is standby mode). And who ever is lasting a week doesn't use the standard battery. I have a color screen phone, and I have to charage it every 4-5 days. My old non-color screen phone could go way longer without charges.
So basicly figure that the iPod, with a color screen, would probably last half as long for playback.
Originally posted by kupan787
Because the cellphone doesn't have the screen on all the time (that is why it is standby mode).
If you are referring to background light, this is off most of the time, true. But this also applies to the iPod screen. The display proper is on on the cell phone, because it displays the status screen.
Color LCDs have 3x as many transistors as monochrome displays, but the transistor size is 3x smaller. Is anyone here able to tell from a position of knowledge (as opposed to guesswork) if this cancels out each other (guess: yes)?
Do color LCDs need a stronger background light because of the color filters (guess: yes). And what about transflexive diplays (guess: need less power)?
What apple may well do is use Light Emitting Polymer Displays (LEP) in their new ipods as these are currently becoming used in digital cameras, and are far more energy efficient (no backlighting as the screen itself emmits light). There are a few other options around as well - most of which are still in the developement stage though.
New battery developements are constantly being made. Without going into technicalities, I am sure that improved versions that give 8h wih a colour screen etc will emerge soon.
Since apple has made such a global move with iTunes and iPod and now posting playlists on the net, this would suggest that they intend to implement as simple a manner of showing off your pictures via the iPod (on the screen and/or through a connection to TV) and also easily publishing/printing albums on the web. Simplicity is the key. The videoPod killer, whoever is making it (can't remember), will be too complicated, apple don't do complicated. Much like I bought a Sony Ericsson T68i as it had 'everything' at the time... 2 months and I changed to Nokia, simpler, less gadgetry, looked good => better (was more expensive though, but I didn't care).
Afterall, Apple has been working closely with Belkin who make the SD card attachment and other such things which would be useful with such an iPod.
With possible battery improvements/cost willing, bluetooth could be built-in to the device. For image transfer (from mobile phones predominantly) and more importantly, the iPod would cut out if someone called you on your phone or you could use the iPod as a handsfree for your phone. However I see this to be fairly unlikely as yet, maybe in the future....
I firmly believe the new layout of buttons will be the same as on the miniPods, allowing space for a larger display.
Obviously a larger HDD would be in order at this point too.
The price is anyones guess, but I suppose following the present 40gb wouldn't be out of order, perhaps a wee bit more at the start.
iRiver is coming out with a new hd based mp3 player in Europe around May-June
http://www.irivernordic.com/products...5fc87754aa3eb7
it's going to incorporate a 2" color LCD, and have .jpeg and .bmp support.
The interesting thing I noticed is the iRiver H300 is just a little bit bigger than the 3rd gen ipods but not by much at all
20 gig ipod = 4.1 x 2.4 x .52 @ 5.6 oz
20 gig iriver H300 = 4.1 x 2.45 x .9 @ 6.53 oz
It also has a battery life of up to 16hrs on it.
I'm sure Apple can and probably will go this route with something prettier and user-friendly. I just hope we get that reported battery life that the iRiver and every other brand out there brags about.
the specs are preliminary on this model of course, but I assume iRiver will wait and see if apple brings the 4th gen ipod out so it can compete with apple and steal sales
I see a new ipod at WWDC as possible
But that does not stop Apple from developing a new device,
Maybe he will call it the iLife portable. It would have to be a pretty simple device, otherwise the price will be unjustifiable vs. a low end ibook.
What I see, and mind you it's really funny, is the familiar Peecee way of competing here. The though from iRiver is "if I can somehow add some feature that the ipod doesn't have I can beat it" . This is not going to happen. How oftend are you walking down the street wanting to run through a bunch of pictures? People break out the pictures on special occaisions. Pictures are just not that important for the average person on a daily basis.
Video iPods are offered by those with no originality. They assume that video is the next logical step for portable devices but really fail to think about this deeper.
The real goal for video is to encompass the "magic" of the iPod in a video product for the home. No one has made the perfect solution yet. Apple probably won't try unless they know they can do it better than anyone else.
Dumb because there is an underlying assumption that "after the audio there comes the video" as sure as "night follows day" - or as "TV follows radio".
This assumption is wrong. Because pocket video devices bring with them no market. Hey dood check out my 1984 video walkman...
1) No one wants to watch Pirates of the Carribean while jogging
2) No one will be watching Debbie Does Dallas in the office by the photocopier
3) No movie studio will be selling thumbnail format versions of Wizard of Oz to a non-existent market.
Those new PDAs with color screens are similar in form factor to the notional pocket video iPod. One of the first things people do is download and watch a movie on them. "Isn't this cool" they laugh. And having done it - they never do it again. Because people don't use pocket devices like this.
Yes, a color screen on an iPod might make it a marginally more desirable device. Yes, the ability to preview photos might result in another tick-box being ticked which if Apple are lucky, might translate into a couple of thousand extra sales.
And yes the ability to play a 1Gig VCD movie on the tiny screen might mean that security guards across the world can enjoy a guilty pleasure in pocket format.
But all these things are little significance. A better iPod would have more battery life. A better iPod would do a better job with bookmarks for long tracks. A better iPod would make music sound better.
An Apple device dedicated to recording, playing, storing & burning video material might be a product worth buying. Apple might decide to use the iPod brand to describe it - but making such a machine pocketable would be pointless and counter productive. A pocket toaster on the other hand....
C.
Originally posted by Carniphage
C.
Amen.
But a question. Does anyone think Apple would simultaneously have two portable consumer devices - the iPod *and* a vPod?
While an iPod can't really be a vPod (form factor, battery life, functional purity etc), a vPod could be an iPod. It would have to play audio, and Apple would ensure that a simple interface was evolved for it.
Originally posted by TrunksGoku
iRiver is coming out with a new hd based mp3 player in Europe around May-June
[...]
The interesting thing I noticed is the iRiver H300 is just a little bit bigger than the 3rd gen ipods but not by much at all
20 gig ipod = 4.1 x 2.4 x .52 @ 5.6 oz
20 gig iriver H300 = 4.1 x 2.45 x .9 @ 6.53 oz
Well, except for being almost twice as thick.
For all that, they'd better be able to stick a big fat battery or two in there.
I'm sure Apple can and probably will go this route with something prettier and user-friendly. I just hope we get that reported battery life that the iRiver and every other brand out there brags about.
Well, how big do you want the iPod to be? If it's going to remain relatively small and (especially) slim, that means a smaller battery, which means less battery life. The obvious way around that is to minimize the number of demands on the battery, which means that color screens, wireless connectivity, support for even more things that require the hard drive to spin up, etc., all have to be weighed against the cost in battery life and device size.
And, of course, I'd like to see how they got 16 hours. Turn off the screen and play the same song over and over again on mute?