A typical AA disposable alkaline cell has 2800mAh @ 1.5VDC (nominal). You can extrapolate this to be 4.2Wh per cell for 16.8Wh total. A top-end AA-sized LiIon cell has about 3.7Wh. And you can't even fit one in an iPod. The LiIon-polymer flat pack in the iPod most likely carries between 1200 and 1600mAh at 3.7VDC, hence yielding no more than 6Wh.
So there it is. The Casio portable TV has a lot more juice, and it also has the advantage of not having to decode MPEG4 or whatever the iPod uses. Knocking out a Hilbert transform to decode analog TV is a lot less CPU/DSP intense than is MPEG.
If I knew what you were talking about, that would be great
I envy your knowledge of things.........................
If I knew what you were talking about, that would be great
I envy your knowledge of things.........................
Four years of electrical engineering in college and three years of electronic product design will do that to a person. . . at least when the topic is electronic products.
Perhaps a foolish question/speculation. Video encoding has been all about reducing the size of the files, at the expense of higher processing/computation requirements. Is there some sort of size, quality, and CPU usage/power - pick two balance? Nowadays, memory is much cheaper. Is it time to start using larger files with lower CPU/power requirements?
Maybe if Apple used a less sophisticated video encoding, with larger file sizes, they could coax longer battery life out of the iPods?
Needs more storage? Yes, why not. Same price points, now 2GB, 4GB, and 8GB. I'll take one.
Needs video? No, but if it doesn't cost anything to add the functionality, OK. One small reconfiguration could see the screen get taller, that way you turn the nano sideways when playing video.
What it really needs is a good FM tuner, this is always useful, and a built in microphone that records a decent quality file. The nano is about the perfect size and shape for a voice recorder. Add-ons are clumsy, it's time to build these two features in to the device.
Perhaps a foolish question/speculation. Video encoding has been all about reducing the size of the files, at the expense of higher processing/computation requirements. Is there some sort of size, quality, and CPU usage/power - pick two balance? Nowadays, memory is much cheaper. Is it time to start using larger files with lower CPU/power requirements?
Maybe if Apple used a less sophisticated video encoding, with larger file sizes, they could coax longer battery life out of the iPods?
- Jasen.
The other concern is that memory usage requires a fair amount of power, so in some respects reducing the amount of memory used is the best way to reduce power. MPEG in general requires a fair amount of processing, but MPEG2 is very mature and there are some very low power MPEG2 decoders out there. It would be interesting to evaluate MPEG2 vs. MPEG4 decoders for power dissipation.
I read a how-to and at least 3 testimonials as to how to upgrade your existing 4GB nano to 8GB by just buying another 4gb chip and soldering it into an empty location on the nano's circuit board. That's right, it was already setup to do it.
The other 4GB chip cost ~$80 IIRC, however, I think the reason Apple didn't do this to begin with was that it would create a massive shortage. That's not to mention the small profit margins already with the nanos.
Apple needed to make 4GB chips so samsung could get the capital to build several new factories, lower their prices, and increase their profit margins.
What it really needs is a good FM tuner, this is always useful, and a built in microphone that records a decent quality file. The nano is about the perfect size and shape for a voice recorder. Add-ons are clumsy, it's time to build these two features in to the device.
FM tuners and microphones are too large for the form-factor. I think the most amazing thing is the fact that it outputs audio at all.. Remarkable.
That being said, there's no reason why the regular iPod doesn't have an FM tuner/mic. I'd love a directional microphone to record lectures at school--may have even brought my 79% in Anatomy I up to a B. ARG! still fuming over that.
I'd trade video functionality for that. In fact, until they start including mics with iPods, I won't be replacing my 3G (??) 40GB which I got a month after they came out. Yeah uh... the battery lasts 20 minutes these days.
Easy enough to replace even on a 3g. I was all freaked out about replacing the battery on my 4g after all the hype about how they aren't replacable. It took 10 minutes when I finally worked myself up to doing it. It was very easy, as long as you have the use of both hands (...and I guess your brain )
Easy enough to replace even on a 3g. I was all freaked out about replacing the battery on my 4g after all the hype about how they aren't replacable. It took 10 minutes when I finally worked myself up to doing it. It was very easy, as long as you have the use of both hands (...and I guess your brain )
Hahah, funny you should mention that.. shortly after posting I ordered a replacement battery online.
Say goodbye to the custom battery pack (94 hrs of extra battery life):
You should patent that design. I am sure the patent office would do it. "Unique use of a phone cord, in extending the battery life of an iPod" YOU COULD MAKE MILLIONS... can I borrow a couple of bucks?
FM tuner is NOT too big. The smallest IC FM tuner is 5x5x1mm and requires no other support hardware, iPod has an amp and digital display built-in. Antenna can be wired through headphone cord, problem solved. Sanyo has a version of the IC tcoming that can receive AM as well...
FM tuner is NOT too big. The smallest IC FM tuner is 5x5x1mm and requires no other support hardware, iPod has an amp and digital display built-in. Antenna can be wired through headphone cord, problem solved. Sanyo has a version of the IC tcoming that can receive AM as well...
More of it is finding room for the antenna. It's possible, I suppose, that Apple would try to integrate it into the headphone wires. But then you'd have to use the Apple headphones to listen to the radio.
More of it is finding room for the antenna. It's possible, I suppose, that Apple would try to integrate it into the headphone wires. But then you'd have to use the Apple headphones to listen to the radio.
Radio is so far outside of the accoustic spectrum that the ground wires on standard heaphones might work fine. Mind you, I've never tried this, nor am I an RF or audio engineer. I can imagine that it has been tried before, but I haven't heard of it.
Someone mentioned a voice recorder. The 5G is supposed to support voice recording by add-on, there aren't any adapters available! If they hadn't junked the remote connector on the top, any one of a number of existing products would have worked.
Radio is so far outside of the accoustic spectrum that the ground wires on standard heaphones might work fine. Mind you, I've never tried this, nor am I an RF or audio engineer. I can imagine that it has been tried before, but I haven't heard of it.
That sounds iffy (no pun intended). Wouldn't EMR from the audio interfere with the signal (which is also EMR)?
You ever see those TV RF things that hook into your house's power? They're HUGE and heavy. Maybe technology has changed, but I'd imagine filters would be necessary.
Edit: I should point out that I didn't realize FM tuners had gotten so small, and that's a very good point, Matsu. Last I remembered, the smallest FM tuner was 125mm^3 (provided 5^3 still = 125.. that could've changed too \).
If so, filters could be built into the headphone jack, or a small inline adaptor provided for third party 'phones. Something like the clip on remote that came with my 3G iPod that would house the antenna, and regular ear bud go into that...
With the popularity of iPod I would be surprised if a whole host iPod compatible headphones didn't come out as well. Just make sure that regular phones work well (if not with radio)
Then again, fittiment of a tuner just can't be that much of an issue -- it's in too many other players for it to be technically difficult in any way.
I just want a mic. Nano or not. I'm in utter shock every time the iPod is udpated and it's not added. I mean wow. Aren't these things for COLLEGE KIDS! LOL Wouldn't it be funny if Steve decided to add a mic and the next Academic year, grades rose nationally. 8)
You should patent that design. I am sure the patent office would do it. "Unique use of a phone cord, in extending the battery life of an iPod" YOU COULD MAKE MILLIONS... can I borrow a couple of bucks?
If I ever make ANY money from that, I'll send you some. Don't hold your breath.
That sounds iffy (no pun intended). Wouldn't EMR from the audio interfere with the signal (which is also EMR)?
You ever see those TV RF things that hook into your house's power? They're HUGE and heavy. Maybe technology has changed, but I'd imagine filters would be necessary.
The antenna issue still remains.
I don't think that is the reason.
Audio goes up to 20kHz. Radio starts at 570kHz. You won't be able hear interference in the radio signal directly through the headphones, and radio tuners are designed to ignore everything that's not within a very tight frequency, meaning that the audio doesn't interfere. Radio tuners use filters for this already.
My clock radio sounds very nice for radio and its antenna is only a signle wire, about half a meter long.
Comments
Originally posted by Splinemodel
A typical AA disposable alkaline cell has 2800mAh @ 1.5VDC (nominal). You can extrapolate this to be 4.2Wh per cell for 16.8Wh total. A top-end AA-sized LiIon cell has about 3.7Wh. And you can't even fit one in an iPod. The LiIon-polymer flat pack in the iPod most likely carries between 1200 and 1600mAh at 3.7VDC, hence yielding no more than 6Wh.
So there it is. The Casio portable TV has a lot more juice, and it also has the advantage of not having to decode MPEG4 or whatever the iPod uses. Knocking out a Hilbert transform to decode analog TV is a lot less CPU/DSP intense than is MPEG.
If I knew what you were talking about, that would be great
I envy your knowledge of things.........................
Originally posted by solsun
The new Nano, Video, phone, camera! Not likely, but VERY COOL!
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/9424/
That commercial is SO AWESOME
Originally posted by josa92
If I knew what you were talking about, that would be great
I envy your knowledge of things.........................
Four years of electrical engineering in college and three years of electronic product design will do that to a person. . . at least when the topic is electronic products.
Maybe if Apple used a less sophisticated video encoding, with larger file sizes, they could coax longer battery life out of the iPods?
- Jasen.
Needs more storage? Yes, why not. Same price points, now 2GB, 4GB, and 8GB. I'll take one.
Needs video? No, but if it doesn't cost anything to add the functionality, OK. One small reconfiguration could see the screen get taller, that way you turn the nano sideways when playing video.
What it really needs is a good FM tuner, this is always useful, and a built in microphone that records a decent quality file. The nano is about the perfect size and shape for a voice recorder. Add-ons are clumsy, it's time to build these two features in to the device.
Originally posted by jasenj1
Perhaps a foolish question/speculation. Video encoding has been all about reducing the size of the files, at the expense of higher processing/computation requirements. Is there some sort of size, quality, and CPU usage/power - pick two balance? Nowadays, memory is much cheaper. Is it time to start using larger files with lower CPU/power requirements?
Maybe if Apple used a less sophisticated video encoding, with larger file sizes, they could coax longer battery life out of the iPods?
- Jasen.
The other concern is that memory usage requires a fair amount of power, so in some respects reducing the amount of memory used is the best way to reduce power. MPEG in general requires a fair amount of processing, but MPEG2 is very mature and there are some very low power MPEG2 decoders out there. It would be interesting to evaluate MPEG2 vs. MPEG4 decoders for power dissipation.
I read a how-to and at least 3 testimonials as to how to upgrade your existing 4GB nano to 8GB by just buying another 4gb chip and soldering it into an empty location on the nano's circuit board. That's right, it was already setup to do it.
The other 4GB chip cost ~$80 IIRC, however, I think the reason Apple didn't do this to begin with was that it would create a massive shortage. That's not to mention the small profit margins already with the nanos.
Apple needed to make 4GB chips so samsung could get the capital to build several new factories, lower their prices, and increase their profit margins.
I love supply-chain management
Originally posted by Matsu
What it really needs is a good FM tuner, this is always useful, and a built in microphone that records a decent quality file. The nano is about the perfect size and shape for a voice recorder. Add-ons are clumsy, it's time to build these two features in to the device.
FM tuners and microphones are too large for the form-factor. I think the most amazing thing is the fact that it outputs audio at all.. Remarkable.
That being said, there's no reason why the regular iPod doesn't have an FM tuner/mic. I'd love a directional microphone to record lectures at school--may have even brought my 79% in Anatomy I up to a B. ARG! still fuming over that.
I'd trade video functionality for that. In fact, until they start including mics with iPods, I won't be replacing my 3G (??) 40GB which I got a month after they came out. Yeah uh... the battery lasts 20 minutes these days.
Originally posted by jonathonc1
Easy enough to replace even on a 3g. I was all freaked out about replacing the battery on my 4g after all the hype about how they aren't replacable. It took 10 minutes when I finally worked myself up to doing it. It was very easy, as long as you have the use of both hands (...and I guess your brain
Hahah, funny you should mention that.. shortly after posting I ordered a replacement battery online.
Say goodbye to the custom battery pack (94 hrs of extra battery life):
Yes, that's a telephone cord. Think Different
Originally posted by Matsu
FM tuner is NOT too big. The smallest IC FM tuner is 5x5x1mm and requires no other support hardware, iPod has an amp and digital display built-in. Antenna can be wired through headphone cord, problem solved. Sanyo has a version of the IC tcoming that can receive AM as well...
More of it is finding room for the antenna. It's possible, I suppose, that Apple would try to integrate it into the headphone wires. But then you'd have to use the Apple headphones to listen to the radio.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
More of it is finding room for the antenna. It's possible, I suppose, that Apple would try to integrate it into the headphone wires. But then you'd have to use the Apple headphones to listen to the radio.
Radio is so far outside of the accoustic spectrum that the ground wires on standard heaphones might work fine. Mind you, I've never tried this, nor am I an RF or audio engineer. I can imagine that it has been tried before, but I haven't heard of it.
Someone mentioned a voice recorder. The 5G is supposed to support voice recording by add-on, there aren't any adapters available! If they hadn't junked the remote connector on the top, any one of a number of existing products would have worked.
Originally posted by JeffDM
Radio is so far outside of the accoustic spectrum that the ground wires on standard heaphones might work fine. Mind you, I've never tried this, nor am I an RF or audio engineer. I can imagine that it has been tried before, but I haven't heard of it.
That sounds iffy (no pun intended). Wouldn't EMR from the audio interfere with the signal (which is also EMR)?
You ever see those TV RF things that hook into your house's power? They're HUGE and heavy. Maybe technology has changed, but I'd imagine filters would be necessary.
Edit: I should point out that I didn't realize FM tuners had gotten so small, and that's a very good point, Matsu. Last I remembered, the smallest FM tuner was 125mm^3 (provided 5^3 still = 125.. that could've changed too
The antenna issue still remains.
With the popularity of iPod I would be surprised if a whole host iPod compatible headphones didn't come out as well. Just make sure that regular phones work well (if not with radio)
Then again, fittiment of a tuner just can't be that much of an issue -- it's in too many other players for it to be technically difficult in any way.
Originally posted by jonathonc1
You should patent that design. I am sure the patent office would do it. "Unique use of a phone cord, in extending the battery life of an iPod" YOU COULD MAKE MILLIONS... can I borrow a couple of bucks?
If I ever make ANY money from that, I'll send you some. Don't hold your breath.
Originally posted by slughead
That sounds iffy (no pun intended). Wouldn't EMR from the audio interfere with the signal (which is also EMR)?
You ever see those TV RF things that hook into your house's power? They're HUGE and heavy. Maybe technology has changed, but I'd imagine filters would be necessary.
The antenna issue still remains.
I don't think that is the reason.
Audio goes up to 20kHz. Radio starts at 570kHz. You won't be able hear interference in the radio signal directly through the headphones, and radio tuners are designed to ignore everything that's not within a very tight frequency, meaning that the audio doesn't interfere. Radio tuners use filters for this already.
My clock radio sounds very nice for radio and its antenna is only a signle wire, about half a meter long.