Apple releases new iPods, reduces prices

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 44
    e1618978e1618978 Posts: 6,074member
    I just noticed that the gold mini is no longer offered as well.
  • Reply 22 of 44
    acr4acr4 Posts: 100member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by danielandrews

    Didn't that happen a while ago?



    maybe... I know my 4g came with both, but that was in February. My 3g came with firewire plus a 4-pin firewire adapter... Maybe I missed something along the way.
  • Reply 23 of 44
    commoduscommodus Posts: 270member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by e1618978

    I just noticed that the gold mini is no longer offered as well.



    They stopped offering that in February!
  • Reply 24 of 44
    ipodandimacipodandimac Posts: 3,273member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by FireEmblemPride

    Actually, the 20GB photo is the exact same size and weight as the 30GB. How that's possible, I don't know.



    oh my bad. well, the 20GB still got thicker for no reason.
  • Reply 25 of 44
    cosmonutcosmonut Posts: 4,872member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by acr4

    Still though, they are sending the message that Firewire is inferior to USB.



    They aren't sending any message at all.



    They simply realized that Mac and Windows users alike can both use USB 2.0, and that including a firewire cable makes the overall package cost more when most iPodders probably wouldn't use it anyway.



    "What's this cable for? Eh, whatever. I recognize THIS one," as she holds up the USB cable and tosses the firewire cable back into the box to never be seen again.



    Remember, too, that to most people, it's a plug. Plug A goes into jack A. If plug B doesn't go into jack A, why even have plug B?
  • Reply 26 of 44
    louzerlouzer Posts: 1,054member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by acr4

    So, first Apple announces the Intel switch. Then people ponder whether Firewire will survive the switch. Now they are releasing new iPods without Firewire cables? Seems rather suspicious to me... Or maybe they realized that most Windows users still don't have 6-pin Firewire. Still though, they are sending the message that Firewire is inferior to USB.



    Just an observation.




    Damn, I just noticed that Apple no longer sells a 604e-based computer. When did this happen?????



    Firewire cables were removed on the last refresh (february was it?). Along with the gold mini (which I'm sure someone was just joking about just noticing it was missing).



    And its all about the fact that more windows users by an iPod, and most don't have firewire.



    Of course, I would like it if apple sold computers with more ports than the crap number they offer now. 3 USB ports on a Pro machine? That's it? WTF is that all about? Keyboard in one, UPS plugs into the second, where the hell is the printer supposed to plug into? The front? What, I need to spend more money on a USB hub just because I make the mistake of having peripherals, which Apple forces you to get, BTW, because they offer no internal expansion.
  • Reply 27 of 44
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ipodandimac

    oh my bad. well, the 20GB still got thicker for no reason.



    How about the reason being longer battery life? The 20 now has 15 hour playback like the photos have always had.



    Macaddict16
  • Reply 28 of 44
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Macaddict16

    How about the reason being longer battery life? The 20 now has 15 hour playback like the photos have always had.



    Macaddict16




    Yeah, but it's also the exact dimensions and weight as the 30GB photo, which is odd.
  • Reply 29 of 44
    afalknerafalkner Posts: 73member
    technically speaking...isnt USB 2.0 faster than Firewire anyway??? I always thought...



    Firewire = 430mbs

    USB 2.0 = 480mbs





    is this right?



    Also I have had numerous iPods since they were first released and I've noticed with everyone one that the packaging is cheaper and you get less stuff. Some of it makes sense but I feel apple has compromised on the user experience of opening your iPod in order to cut costs. And when they say there was a price drop..was there really? They should say that you can now buy your iPod for less because apple is giving you less stuff.



    I also dont get why they didnt just do away with the 20 and keep the 30 and 60?? but then I guess that wouldnt have been much of an update, Announcing only that they got rid of the 20 gig.
  • Reply 30 of 44
    ipodandimacipodandimac Posts: 3,273member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by afalkner

    technically speaking...isnt USB 2.0 faster than Firewire anyway??? I always thought...



    Firewire = 430mbs

    USB 2.0 = 480mbs





    is this right?




    sort of. for burst transfers (like updating play counts, ratings, and a few songs on your ipod) usb2.0 IS faster. for sustained transfers (like capturing video) firewire is much better. in the grand scheme of things, it's not going to make much of a difference. if you restore your ipod every day and re-sync thousands of songs, get a firewire cable.
  • Reply 31 of 44
    true, while every modern mac comes equipped w/ FW, not every PC does. in fact i'd argue that most don't. they have their bases covered w/ USB 2.0.I've gotten similar transfer rates on my external USB2 and FW drives. xbench gives me very similar results between the 2 standards, tho i know FW usually has a lower CPU overhead.
  • Reply 32 of 44
    wyntirwyntir Posts: 88member
    400Mb/s = 50MB/s, much faster than any 1.8" hard drive (or even most 3.5" ones). Which is to say, there will likely be zero difference in real-world speed between FW and USB2 iPods.
  • Reply 33 of 44
    itsamacitsamac Posts: 20member
    I picked up the 4G 20Gb iPod a couple of weeks ago but returned it the same day because the battery life was a bit too low for my liking and I got used to the colour screen on my wife's 60Gb iPod Photo. For me, I only have 8Gb of music so the 20Gb works fine for me.



    As for the size, I am used to the Photo. Sure the 4G 20Gb model was nice and thin but the battery life was too low for most people's liking. Until they can make fuel cells that ultra thin and ultra cheap for mass consumption, then there will always be a bit of bulk with longer battery life models...My guess with this "new" model is they have actually locked the 30Gb model down to 20Gb.



    With regards to returns/price differences, I only know Apple's policy in the UK. Basically you can return any item without penalty as long as it is returned in the original packaging. If the packaging has been removed, they do reserve the right to charge a restocking fee. If Apple reduces the price of the model within 14 days of purchase you need to take the receipt down to an Apple store to claim the difference.
  • Reply 34 of 44
    noirdesirnoirdesir Posts: 1,027member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by FireEmblemPride

    Yeah, but it's also the exact dimensions and weight as the 30GB photo, which is odd.



    The original 20GB 4G iPod was 0.57" thick and had a battery life of 12h. The 40GB 4G iPod was somewhat thicker (around 0.68/0.69 I think) because its harddrive had two platters, but with the same battery life.



    The 40 and 60GB (4G) iPod photo both were 0.75" thick, i.e. approximately 0.05/0.06" thicker than the corresponding 40GB standard 4G iPod, mainly because they had a physically bigger battery resulting in a longer battery life of 15h.



    The 30GB (4G) iPod photo, had a reduced thickness of 0.63", compared to 40GB and 60GB models, because its harddrive had just one platter, but the same battery as the bigger models and therefore the same battery life.



    The "new" 20GB (4G) iPod color is just the same model as the 30GB iPod photo with a smaller harddrive (lower data density, same physical dimensions, i.e. older and cheaper model). Its battery life is therefore the same 15h.
  • Reply 35 of 44
    ipodandimacipodandimac Posts: 3,273member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by itsamac

    .My guess with this "new" model is they have actually locked the 30Gb model down to 20Gb.





    doubt it. 20GB drives are MUCH cheaper to produce than 30GB ones. That's why 20GB is a very common size for mp3 players. also, is it so hard to believe that they just put the guts of the 20GB into the 30GB housing?
  • Reply 36 of 44
    Boo.



    Apple needed to deliver something wonderful and new (5th generation iPod, anyone?) not just repackage and diminish the same 'ol same 'ol.



    They didn't even keep the 30GB iPod photo! That should have just become the new $299 iPod. What a rip.
  • Reply 37 of 44
    Quote:

    Originally posted by afalkner

    [B]technically speaking...isnt USB 2.0 faster than Firewire anyway??? I always thought...



    Firewire = 430mbs

    USB 2.0 = 480mbs





    is this right?



    Also I have had numerous iPods since they were first released and I've noticed with everyone one that the packaging is cheaper and you get less stuff. Some of it makes sense but I feel apple has compromised on the user experience of opening your iPod in order to cut costs. And when they say there was a price drop..was there really? They should say that you can now buy your iPod for less because apple is giving you less stuff.



    I thought the excesive and expensive packaging was wasteful and unnecesary. I dont see the point of a very expensive box that will be thrown in the garbage anyways.
  • Reply 38 of 44
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Apparatus

    Apple needed to deliver something wonderful and new (5th generation iPod, anyone?) not just repackage and diminish the same 'ol same 'ol.



    I agree the 5g needs to come soon and, who says it won't?



    This update was minimal...as people said they probably merged the guts of the old 20gb and 30gb photo so probably not much design and manufacture change there. I think it's still highly likely that a major redesign is coming. Could be this was just to tide folks over until it's ready. September would be the earliest I'd guess...they'll want to hit either back-to-school or Christmas.



    If Apple leaves the 4th gen iPod as is for longer than that...I dunno what to say, they really will have just dropped the ball. Apple tends to be smarter than that.
  • Reply 39 of 44
    19841984 Posts: 955member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by FireEmblemPride

    Yeah, but it's also the exact dimensions and weight as the 30GB photo, which is odd.



    You're looking at it the wrong way. The didn't upgrade the 20GB model, they downgraded the 30GB model. In other words they just took a 30GB iPod Photo and replaced the 30GB drive with a 20GB drive. Presto! They have a "new" lower priced color screen model.
  • Reply 40 of 44
    gruthgruth Posts: 35member
    From Apple's website:



    "Choose from 20GB or 60GB models and carry up to 15,000 songs or as many as 25,000 photos in your pocket."



    Can someone explain why the 60GB model doesn't store 3x as many photos as the 20GB, instead of only about 1.7x?



    Thanks.
Sign In or Register to comment.