Image shows fifth-gen iPod case, accessories

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 35
    nagrommenagromme Posts: 2,834member
    That's a very weird collage!



    What's the case lined with? The old Apple belt cases were just a bit abrasive (not what you want).



    I like that it's not a black case. I never liked that look for the old case.
  • Reply 2 of 35
    That firewire cable... is it out of place? I hope not, seeing as my iBook G3 doesn't have USB 2.0...
  • Reply 3 of 35
    jonyojonyo Posts: 116member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by OllieWallieWhiskers

    That firewire cable... is it out of place? I hope not, seeing as my iBook G3 doesn't have USB 2.0...





    I know that it doesn't come with that firewire cable, only a USB cable (according to Apple's new iPod tech spec pages that list the included stuff), so that picture is a bit misleading. The question on many people's minds is...does it still work with firewire like previous iPod that didn't ship with a firewire cable, if you buy a cable separately? From reading various forums and such today, it seems some people are assuming it DOESN'T work for firewire anymore becaue all the iPod info pages about it don't mention FW anywhere at all, and some people are assuming it DOES. I'm not sure. It's possible that removing FW capability saved space inside via removing a chip or two, but I was under the impression that FW and USB connection was supplied via the same chip (chipset) in the thing, so that removing FW capability would take MORE reengineering from the last iPod gen rather than LESS, and would also not save any internal space at all. So, hmm. I don't think anyone knows for sure right now. We'll have to wait until someone gets their hands on one and tries it out.



    - JonYo
  • Reply 4 of 35
    jonyojonyo Posts: 116member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by OllieWallieWhiskers

    That firewire cable... is it out of place? I hope not, seeing as my iBook G3 doesn't have USB 2.0...



    I'm noticing that an article on Maccentral.com (links to playlistmag, http://playlistmag.com/news/2005/10/...ance/index.php ) says that the new video ipod will charge via FW, but will not sync via it anymore. I don't know where they're getting that info though, as I don't see anything saying that explicitly on Apple's info pages about the new ipod.



    Kind of a bummer that the remote port is now gone, so my TenTechnology IR remote wouldn't work with these new models, nor would my Griffin Tech AirClick. 's ok, I'm not selling my 60GB ipod photo anytime soon...



    - JonYo
  • Reply 5 of 35
    Something tells me that case was a post-nano scratching fiasco stop gap add-on...
  • Reply 6 of 35
    rokrok Posts: 3,519member
    yeah, i want the 60 GB iPod (after years of fence-sitting), but i would like ot know if i need to buy a usb 2.0 card for my dual g4 at home.
  • Reply 7 of 35
    jonyojonyo Posts: 116member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by rok

    yeah, i want the 60 GB iPod (after years of fence-sitting), but i would like ot know if i need to buy a usb 2.0 card for my dual g4 at home.



    Consider this:

    Even if the new video ipods did sync with FW, you'd have to buy the FW-to-dock cable separately for a ripoff price of $19.



    A Belkin PCI card with 3 external USB 2.0 ports is only $30.



    I'd just get the card if you have the free PCI slot.



    - JonYo
  • Reply 8 of 35
    rokrok Posts: 3,519member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by jonyo

    Consider this:

    Even if the new video ipods did sync with FW, you'd have to buy the FW-to-dock cable separately for a ripoff price of $19.



    A Belkin PCI card with 3 external USB 2.0 ports is only $30.



    I'd just get the card if you have the free PCI slot.



    - JonYo




    hmmm... good point. i guess if, given the choice, i like to opt for not popping open my case... which explains the spaghetti nightmare of cables behind my cpu at home.



    the sonnet tempo trio card, though, sure looks nice, since it packs so darned much on one card (usb 2.0, extra firewire 400 ports, and dual-channel ata-133... don't laugh, my machine at home is all ata-133, and it flies with as much ram i have packed inside).
  • Reply 9 of 35
    Quote:

    Originally posted by jonyo



    Kind of a bummer that the remote port is now gone, so my TenTechnology IR remote wouldn't work with these new models, nor would my Griffin Tech AirClick. 's ok, I'm not selling my 60GB ipod photo anytime soon...



    - JonYo




    Why did they get rid of that port? They just eliminated many accessories that used it. Griffin's NEW iTrip is useless now. And they've had to make it again! Now they have one that connects via the dock connector. But if you're in your car you can't plug in power through the dock connector AND play your iTrip anymore. Which is what many people do I'm sure. *sigh*



    I prefer an auxiliary input line to the iPod anyway while in the car, but still...
  • Reply 10 of 35
    xoolxool Posts: 2,460member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by StockholmSyndrome23

    Something tells me that case was a post-nano scratching fiasco stop gap add-on...



    My thoughts too, but you never know.



    And yes, that FireWire cable in the image is way outta place.
  • Reply 11 of 35
    macgregormacgregor Posts: 1,434member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by jonyo

    Consider this:

    Even if the new video ipods did sync with FW, you'd have to buy the FW-to-dock cable separately for a ripoff price of $19.



    A Belkin PCI card with 3 external USB 2.0 ports is only $30.



    I'd just get the card if you have the free PCI slot.



    - JonYo




    Yeah, it is better to pay $30 than $19.



    How much trouble would keeping FW compatibility really be?!!? C'mon Apple, what did Intel promise you? And besides, now that the iPod is video functional, it won't accept FW downloads from your Sony camcorder?!?!?! What's with that? A nice selling point to video professionals out the window.
  • Reply 12 of 35
    Well, if Apple did make it firewire compatible, it would be thicker and heavier. So, maybe it's for the best.\
  • Reply 13 of 35
    macgregormacgregor Posts: 1,434member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dansgil

    Well, if Apple did make it firewire compatible, it would be thicker and heavier. So, maybe it's for the best.\



    A good reason to eventually make a ruggedized, Humvee-like, full metal jacketed pro version. Small market and all, but to have the ability to download and view video in the field while the camera is in use would be awesome.



    I guess much of this could happen with current accessories and third-party access to the os..... ha, ha, yeah, right. It would be great for a bigger software ecosystem to evolve alongside the accessories ecosystem! A few "notes" based programs like Party Pod are the only thing out there now. Is there a way for the drm stuff to be behind a firewall so that the rest of the os could be modified more easily and not make broadcasters and Disney nervous?
  • Reply 14 of 35
    Why is apple eliminating the very architecture they created? It's potential is faster than USB 2.0 right now, aka FW800. It's just dumb that they changed the port going from FW400 to 800. They should have re-architected a way to utilize the same physical connection.



    So in essence, everything will connect to the computer via USB. Nothing else? I don't necessarily like putting all my eggs in one basket.
  • Reply 15 of 35
    Quote:

    Originally posted by willywalloo

    Why is apple eliminating the very architecture they created? It's potential is faster than USB 2.0 right now, aka FW800. It's just dumb that they changed the port going from FW400 to 800. They should have re-architected a way to utilize the same physical connection.



    So in essence, everything will connect to the computer via USB. Nothing else? I don't necessarily like putting all my eggs in one basket.




    In all honesty, FW isn't that much transfer for my music transfers. To transfer 3.7gb to my nano only took about a minute longer than my 4th gen iPod via FW. Most computers have USB 2.0.



    As I said before, FW would make the iPod thicker. It would also have to cost more.
  • Reply 16 of 35
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dansgil

    In all honesty, FW isn't that much transfer for my music transfers. To transfer 3.7gb to my nano only took about a minute longer than my 4th gen iPod via FW. Most computers have USB 2.0.



    As I said before, FW would make the iPod thicker. It would also have to cost more.




    From your numbers, transferring 60GB would take an additional 15 minutes using USB rather than Firewire.



    The claim that FW would make the device more expensive is possibly true, but my bet is that the difference would be negligible. There would be no cost difference to the buyer, but for all I know Apple probably would save fifty cents per iPod. I doubt the unit would be any thicker as circuit boards don't work that way unless the particular IC is thicker than the others.
  • Reply 17 of 35
    You gotta ask how often are you tranfering a full 60 GB? Once only? Not worth it to save 15 one time and raise the price for everyone. Uniformity between mac and pcs is what apple wants. I say bravo. Good move.



    If you are swapping files (multi-gig files) on and off the iPod you should buy an external FW drive. It's mean for music (and now videos). HD mode is fine.. but like I said.. how often do you swap a FULL iPod of data to even see that time difference?
  • Reply 18 of 35
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Not Unlike Myself

    You gotta ask how often are you tranfering a full 60 GB? Once only? Not worth it to save 15 one time and raise the price for everyone. Uniformity between mac and pcs is what apple wants. I say bravo. Good move.





    Every time a firmware restore is done? If somthing goes wrong with the device, too often Apple employees recommend a full restore, which wipes the drive.



    I don't see why saving pocket change in construction expense really makes a difference to the buyer, the price to the buyer would be the same given Apple's fixed price points. Even if it did make a difference, I would gladly pay the little extra.
  • Reply 19 of 35
    maccrazymaccrazy Posts: 2,657member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by jonyo

    Consider this:

    Even if the new video ipods did sync with FW, you'd have to buy the FW-to-dock cable separately for a ripoff price of $19.



    A Belkin PCI card with 3 external USB 2.0 ports is only $30.



    I'd just get the card if you have the free PCI slot.



    - JonYo




    Not if you already have a FireWire wire from a previous iPod. BUT no iPods support FireWire as of yesterday anyway.
  • Reply 20 of 35
    Quote:

    Originally posted by nagromme

    That's a very weird collage!



    What's the case lined with? The old Apple belt cases were just a bit abrasive (not what you want).



    I like that it's not a black case. I never liked that look for the old case.




    I am new to IPOD's--just ordered the new 30gb one--I am assuming these cases don't come with it, correct? Also, what is the fallout going to be since there doesn't seem to be a digital out in terms of having a car connection? Talk to me here people talk to me. [by the way pardon my ignorance]
Sign In or Register to comment.