Not to rain on anyone's parade here, but what part of Jobs saying that the next iPod will run OS X leads people to immediately assume touch screen? Or Wifi and PDA and Safari, etc.?
Oh, it'll most definately be touch interfaced. Let's think about it and use the iPhone as an example. They have created in the iPhone a whole new way to work with your music. They have also integrated coverflow. The touch interface where you can flick your finger across and stop scrolling with a touch is superior to the wheel on current iPods. Once you try it on an iPhone you'll see how good it is.
Also, it's really expected that the next generation iPod will have a larger screen. The touch wheel needs to take a lot of room. There were all kinds of mockups of virtual touch-screen wheels but that would be pathetic compared to the solution they came up with for the iPhone. Another point is that if it's going to have OS X, it doesn't make any sense to stick with the small screen. I mean why even bother?
So, in my book, an OS X running iPod guarantees a large screen which also guarantees a touch interface.
You can get one of those now if you want - just get an iPhone and cancel your AT&T contract.
Actually, I don't think you can. I read an article recently abut the iPhone that stated if the phone's not activated, the iPod won't work. You need to be in a contract to use anything about that thing.
Give me a 32Gig memory card IPod with the interface of the iPhone and I'm there... even if it's a little pricey. You can keep all the WiFi stuff. Really the only thing that'd make it any nicer for me as an entertainment unit is a bluetooth headset.
Actually, I don't think you can. I read an article recently abut the iPhone that stated if the phone's not activated, the iPod won't work. You need to be in a contract to use anything about that thing.
That's why I said "cancel your contract." There are several methods of using an phoneless-iphone, listed here.
Not to rain on anyone's parade here, but what part of Jobs saying that the next iPod will run OS X leads people to immediately assume touch screen? Or Wifi and PDA and Safari, etc.?
I'm not saying we won't get there eventually, but I don't know how Apple could make an 80 GB touch screen iPod any cheaper than the $600 iPhone. And $600 is pretty steep just for an iPod at this point.
...
What do we know for sure about the next iPod? It will run OS X. That's it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daffy_Duck
Oh, it'll most definately be touch interfaced....So, in my book, an OS X running iPod guarantees a large screen which also guarantees a touch interface.
Daffy Duck is completely right here. Who, after seeing the iPhone (and who hasn't), is going to buy a "video" iPod that doesn't have a screen at least as large? Not me. ESPECIALLY if the price point isn't substantially better. For that, I might as well buy a 5G.
There is NO POINT in running OS X if they're not going to be using a large screen. None. Zilch. Zippo.
And as far as costs are concerned, we're talking about some pretty pricey hardware to be left out of an iPhone to create a great new iPod. iPhones are only costing Apple something like $270 to make anyway, so if we're dropping some of the more expensive features (cough-telphony-cough-Goggle Maps-cough) and replacing NAND with hard drives, how does anyone come to the conclusion that the price must stay high? That doesn't make any sense at all.
i can't believe people think they'll get an iPod with email and gps for less than an iPhone.
I agree.
Quote:
here's what i see for the new iPod:
take a look at the home screen on the iPhone -
get rid of SMS text, youTube, Stocks, Maps and Weather widgets.
good, now get rid of phone, mail and safari on the bottom.
[basically anything that requires an internet connection]
now switch the icons around - from the home screen it's an ipod, but with an OSX style hiding dock that has calendar, photos, camera, clock, calculator, notes and settings.
i would hope there are 60 and 100 gig hard drives in these things, but i see Jobs going all SSD too soon, with 8 and 16 gig versions. possibly a 32, but i think that would put the price point too high.
OK, but in your idea, you remove <$15 worth of communication chips and add $100 in mass storage hardware. Plus Apple gets $$$ from AT&T for the iPhone. Sorry, I don't see that being cheaper than the iPhone either.
I'd say early September is more likely based on past experience... October might be too late - they don't want to release too close to the "holiday season" or they'll have massive stock shortages... September is a good compromise - it gives people enough time to buy them, wave them around to their friends and for their friends to get it on their wish lists
I think Apple are going to have to come up with a product that is either
- Much more like the existing iPods - we've seen some patents showing touch screen scroll wheels for example.
- Completely different to the iPhone...
They'd be foolish to produce an iPod that looked exactly like an iPhone - they need brand differentiation...
they have been hit and miss but mostly hit recently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wally007
Actually they've done very well lately. Especially with Leopard release when everybody AND APPLE denied reports that Leopard is delayed , digitimes stood by their reports and said October release.
The Leopard delay was the only thing they "predicted" correctly. Apple then said IN RESPONSE to the DigiTimes report that it would not be delayed. A week or two later, they retracted that statement and officially announced the October roll-out date for Leopard.
Why would Apple deny the delay if they were just going to confirm it two weeks later? That makes no sense and only makes them look stupid. If Apple had decided concretely that they were going to push back until October they would have said something to the effect of, "We always plan to hit our target dates but occasionally we take more time than previously thought to get our projects perfected. We'll keep you informed if we decide to do this regarding Leopard."
They didn't though. They flat out denied it. That leads me to think that they had no concrete plans to delay. There was no "DigiTimes standing their ground." They may have heard a rumor, bit at it, like they always do, and this time they actually happened to be right.
If you report every rumor you hear, eventually you will be right.
Oh, it'll most definately be touch interfaced. Let's think about it and use the iPhone as an example. They have created in the iPhone a whole new way to work with your music. They have also integrated coverflow. The touch interface where you can flick your finger across and stop scrolling with a touch is superior to the wheel on current iPods. Once you try it on an iPhone you'll see how good it is.
Also, it's really expected that the next generation iPod will have a larger screen. The touch wheel needs to take a lot of room. There were all kinds of mockups of virtual touch-screen wheels but that would be pathetic compared to the solution they came up with for the iPhone. Another point is that if it's going to have OS X, it doesn't make any sense to stick with the small screen. I mean why even bother?
So, in my book, an OS X running iPod guarantees a large screen which also guarantees a touch interface.
Apple has hired on additional engineers in some key areas that hint at the multitouch technology becoming the ubiquitous next-gen interface in most of their products.
First there's the addition of panel engineers outside of the iPhone team whose job it will be to work on larger multitouch surfaces. Then there's what appears to be the formation of a "Mobile Mac" business unit within Apple, and a Manager of Mobile Mac Architecture, which is decidedly aimed at developing a product line of portable computing/communications platforms.
Also is the fact that Apple acquired Fingerworks, a company that developed multitouch interfaces... In order for Apple to justify this acquisition, it has got to be for more than a narrow purpose...e.g. iPhone product line only.
In talking with a former Apple product engineer who was around at the time Jobs returned to Apple, he is very keen on the fact that the iPhone uses an ARM processor. ARM is a joint venture between Apple and other partners which makes designs for processors specifically for mobile communications platforms. The Newton/e-Mate used an ARM processor and was Apple's first, but poorly organized, attempt at getting into the mobile computing/communcations (e.g. PDA) market.
My colleague also pointed out that Apple's product development typically involves the introduction of a "feeler" product (e.g. 1st gen iPod) with a small, focused set of features, designed to elicit feedback from the market on a given concept that Apple's been toying with. iPhone is just that... Multitouch is the concept and they're trying to gauge public reaction to it to help shape how they use it in future products.
After 1st Gen iPod came Nano, and Shuffle, iPod Photo, iPod Video, etc. iPhone is more than likely not the flagship product... but the feeler product, after which both smaller and larger implementations of the multitouch technology will take hold.
I think we're likely to see 3G/HSDPA or even 4G/WiMax-enabled ultra-portables with multitouch technology that lie somewhere between a PDA and a tablet computer in terms of size.
Another suggestion regarding how far Apple wants to go with Multitouch is not only Microsoft's reaction, i.e. to announce their entry into the multitouch game, but also the fact that many of Leopard's design enhancements seem ideally suited for a multitouch input device rather than conventional mouse navigation.
A great example of one feature in particular is Stacks... Stacks is really a resurrection of Piles, a project that began in the early 1990's which outlined the ability to expand stacks of documents to see their contents, be able to select documents in the expanded view, and then have them collapse back into a stack on mouse-off. Piles was specifically targeted at use in mobile computing, e.g. Newton/eMate. However, the Newton project was killed and then Piles laid dormant for more than ten years though patents existed off of which they are now capitalizing.
Piles, Coverflow, Spaces, Time Machine, etc. look EXTREMELY suited for multitouch in which navigation through three dimensions/axes can be extraordinarily intuitive and far easier than with a mouse.
Multitouch is, in my opinion, the mother of "killer apps"... bound to redefine the graphical user interface in the most significant way since the introduction of the Macintosh. Part of the challenge that drives the need for multitouch is the growth of the desktop... when you had maybe 5-6 personal folders, and maybe 100 files, conventional mouse and keyboard navigation were easy... but the mushrooming of this scenario to hundreds of folders and tens of thousands of files is exactly what prompted features like Spotlight.
The current standard user interface is no longer doing the trick for quick and simple navigation through your mess of content. That is where Multitouch can fly... by putting you directly in contact with the content of your desktop, you can navigate through data in three dimensions very quickly, as intuitively as you would move around real objects in real space (thanks to some ingenious little "physics" quirks ... e.g. "rubberbanding", variable scroll momentum dictated by the force and speed of the gesture, etc.) and employ simpler "gesturing" that will execute multiple commands in one intuitive handstroke, instead of a series of clicks and keystrokes... thereby greatly reducing the time it takes you to find what you're looking for. Simpler commands executing more complex instructions = efficiency gain.
Note that insiders say that iPhone's forthcoming file management system will be like Leopard's... with Coverflow and probably Stacks... and even now nowhere to be found is there a single traditional finder with nested folders, a command line prompt, or, most notably... not a single clunky series of nested dropdown menus.
These design factors are not merely an "accident"... they're reworking the whole concept toward a better design.
Furthermore, I think that AppleTV, that thing Steve Jobs calls a "hobby" is a project that while not quite ready for "prime time" is acting as a testbed for some later plans they have...
Back when Jobs came on board, he started the concept of the "digital hub"... First there were applications that turned the computer not into the central focus of your lifestyle, but the digital hub to which other lifestyle devices would connect and find purpose... i.e. iPhoto, iTunes, iDVD, iMovie, etc.
Then iPod was introduced... Apple takes the digital hub one step further by introducing one of the most significant appliances to be part of that ecosystem.
Now iPhone and AppleTV are introducing degrees of technological convergence that take the digital hub concept to new dimensions... the LAN and WAN. AppleTV bridges your LAN with your home entertainment. iPhone bridges you with the world. And it's possible iPhone may even end up having the ability (through mere software updates) to act as a Coverflow Remote, giving you the ability to navigate and control AppleTV and its LAN constituents, and queue up selections for viewing on your home entertainment system via AppleTV.
What is the next step in branching out the digital hub? LAN-WAN interconnectivity. Bridging your home network with you on the go in a more elegant manner than clunky VPN software or SSH, remote access, etc. and doing so without being tethered to 802.11 wi-fi or a landline.
Imagine driving the kids to see Grandma and you forgot to load their favorite movie on our iPhone... no problem. The car's built-in navigation/entertainment console happens to be a Mobile Mac with 4G/WiMax and multiple multitouch interfaces in the dash and headrests... Kids punch up the user-friendly touchscreen in the headrest, it communicates over a wireless carrier to your LAN, talks to some AppleTV-like device on the network which locates the file on whichever computer it might be stored on, and streams the video back to the car.
This is the kind of technological convergence that makes the "computing" part of computers so transparent... the kind of elegance Apple is shooting for... and if I can think of it it's not hard to imagine that their much more intelligent product people are probably already testing prototypes as we speak.
so if we're dropping some of the more expensive features (cough-telphony-cough-Goggle Maps-cough) and replacing NAND with hard drives, how does anyone come to the conclusion that the price must stay high?
Drop a $5 phone chip plus maybe Apple is paying a few pennies/license for Google Maps. Replacing NAND with higher capacity hard drives is probably a break even. So, cutting $5.10 from the cost of the iPhone saves how much on the consumer end?
September is iPod month. Mark my words: the 11th the new lineup will arrive based on the previous two years' announcements.
July 31st will see the new iMacs, and hopefully mac mini if there is a SE. Though I realize all of these analysts are saying no more mac mini, eliminating the iMac 17" and the mac mini at the same time would be a huge step, and I think a little too much.
I think the mac mini would be fine if they just give it a substantial upgrade. Apple has enough money not to charge an incredible overhead on it; if they lower the price and make a smaller profit on them than they already do, the mac mini should see renewed interest.
The Leopard delay was the only thing they "predicted" correctly. Apple then said IN RESPONSE to the DigiTimes report that it would not be delayed. A week or two later, they retracted that statement and officially announced the October roll-out date for Leopard.
Why would Apple deny the delay if they were just going to confirm it two weeks later? That makes no sense and only makes them look stupid. If Apple had decided concretely that they were going to push back until October they would have said something to the effect of, "We always plan to hit our target dates but occasionally we take more time than previously thought to get our projects perfected. We'll keep you informed if we decide to do this regarding Leopard."
They didn't though. They flat out denied it. That leads me to think that they had no concrete plans to delay. There was no "DigiTimes standing their ground." They may have heard a rumor, bit at it, like they always do, and this time they actually happened to be right.
If you report every rumor you hear, eventually you will be right.
-Clive
you know what happened to Apple stock when Apple actually acknowledged the delay? it went down almost 4-5%. that's what Apple feared about.
simotanious ipod/imac release? cause the g5 imac was bassed on the ipod, the new imac/new ipod?????
Look at the left side of that "ipod"... whoever faked that image in Photoshop doesn't grasp the concept of depth perspective because the matte they used to create the false image of a full-screen doesn't angle in with the left side of that iPod casing.
"Pretty mediocre photographic fakery," Dr. Emmett Brown - Back to the Future
you know what happened to Apple stock when Apple actually acknowledged the delay? it went down almost 4-5%. that's what Apple feared about.
And that was maybe 15-20% ago... before the iPhone came out. Now the stock is at 132-133... about 20 points higher than where it was when the Leopard delay was announced.
The rumor sounds more than logical. With the iPhone establishing a new design standard anything less in a new iPod design would fall short - something Steve J doesn't like to see.
Two questions are on my mind - first, will it have a hard drive? I hope so, even if it may make the iPod just a little bit thicker. The second is will it basically be a stripped down iPhone? That design is so stunning that I find it hard to believe that Steve J will move too far from it.
Hopefully they will come out with two models - the basic iPod and an iPod with the internet features - basically the iPhone without the phone. It might piss ATT off a little, but I think it would sell like crazy.
I don't think an iPod will have a Hard drive because it would take too long to boot up. The iPhone takes 5-10 seconds to boot and that's all solid state. It would take much longer on a slow spinning 1.8" HDD.
I think their time-frame is a little aggressive. October is more likely (even November). And I'm still not entirely convinced that the 6Gen iPod will have the touch screen. Apple may want to sit on the iPhone for a little longer to entice more people to go pick-up one as their contracts expire.
But there is no doubt that the iPod needs a re-fresh; and while I think that Nano could do with just a memory up-grade this year, the full-sized iPod is essentially unchanged in the past two years. It's a good machine, but like the iMac, it's time for something new to look at.
Edit: Wally beat me to the punch...
They are.. therefore they ideally will start delivering the Xmas season line-up by end of September at the latest in order to fill and educate the retail storefronts as well as maximize the publicity for a strong Christmas selling season. Of course they can deliver later - but they are only cutting the season for the strongest sales of the year if they do and that is a SIN in CE Retail. The point being that Apple will not deliberately delay introducing a Xmas hot item beyond September if they are following a CE creed.
OK, but in your idea, you remove <$15 worth of communication chips and add $100 in mass storage hardware. Plus Apple gets $$$ from AT&T for the iPhone. Sorry, I don't see that being cheaper than the iPhone either.
since the R&D is done, and the cost of components goes down constantly, why not use the same components that you're already manufacturing? what's the total component price of the iPhone in today's dollars? $220?
swap the 8 gigs of flash for an 80 gig HDD and charge $399? [i don't know the component cost for 80gig drives vs. 8gigs of flash...]
Comments
Not to rain on anyone's parade here, but what part of Jobs saying that the next iPod will run OS X leads people to immediately assume touch screen? Or Wifi and PDA and Safari, etc.?
Oh, it'll most definately be touch interfaced. Let's think about it and use the iPhone as an example. They have created in the iPhone a whole new way to work with your music. They have also integrated coverflow. The touch interface where you can flick your finger across and stop scrolling with a touch is superior to the wheel on current iPods. Once you try it on an iPhone you'll see how good it is.
Also, it's really expected that the next generation iPod will have a larger screen. The touch wheel needs to take a lot of room. There were all kinds of mockups of virtual touch-screen wheels but that would be pathetic compared to the solution they came up with for the iPhone. Another point is that if it's going to have OS X, it doesn't make any sense to stick with the small screen. I mean why even bother?
So, in my book, an OS X running iPod guarantees a large screen which also guarantees a touch interface.
You can get one of those now if you want - just get an iPhone and cancel your AT&T contract.
Actually, I don't think you can. I read an article recently abut the iPhone that stated if the phone's not activated, the iPod won't work. You need to be in a contract to use anything about that thing.
Give me a 32Gig memory card IPod with the interface of the iPhone and I'm there... even if it's a little pricey. You can keep all the WiFi stuff. Really the only thing that'd make it any nicer for me as an entertainment unit is a bluetooth headset.
Actually, I don't think you can. I read an article recently abut the iPhone that stated if the phone's not activated, the iPod won't work. You need to be in a contract to use anything about that thing.
That's why I said "cancel your contract." There are several methods of using an phoneless-iphone, listed here.
You can get one of those now if you want - just get an iPhone and cancel your AT&T contract.
You don't even have to do that. Just take out the SIM card.
Not to rain on anyone's parade here, but what part of Jobs saying that the next iPod will run OS X leads people to immediately assume touch screen? Or Wifi and PDA and Safari, etc.?
I'm not saying we won't get there eventually, but I don't know how Apple could make an 80 GB touch screen iPod any cheaper than the $600 iPhone. And $600 is pretty steep just for an iPod at this point.
...
What do we know for sure about the next iPod? It will run OS X. That's it.
Oh, it'll most definately be touch interfaced....So, in my book, an OS X running iPod guarantees a large screen which also guarantees a touch interface.
Daffy Duck is completely right here. Who, after seeing the iPhone (and who hasn't), is going to buy a "video" iPod that doesn't have a screen at least as large? Not me. ESPECIALLY if the price point isn't substantially better. For that, I might as well buy a 5G.
There is NO POINT in running OS X if they're not going to be using a large screen. None. Zilch. Zippo.
And as far as costs are concerned, we're talking about some pretty pricey hardware to be left out of an iPhone to create a great new iPod. iPhones are only costing Apple something like $270 to make anyway, so if we're dropping some of the more expensive features (cough-telphony-cough-Goggle Maps-cough) and replacing NAND with hard drives, how does anyone come to the conclusion that the price must stay high? That doesn't make any sense at all.
i can't believe people think they'll get an iPod with email and gps for less than an iPhone.
I agree.
here's what i see for the new iPod:
take a look at the home screen on the iPhone -
get rid of SMS text, youTube, Stocks, Maps and Weather widgets.
good, now get rid of phone, mail and safari on the bottom.
[basically anything that requires an internet connection]
now switch the icons around - from the home screen it's an ipod, but with an OSX style hiding dock that has calendar, photos, camera, clock, calculator, notes and settings.
i would hope there are 60 and 100 gig hard drives in these things, but i see Jobs going all SSD too soon, with 8 and 16 gig versions. possibly a 32, but i think that would put the price point too high.
OK, but in your idea, you remove <$15 worth of communication chips and add $100 in mass storage hardware. Plus Apple gets $$$ from AT&T for the iPhone. Sorry, I don't see that being cheaper than the iPhone either.
I think Apple are going to have to come up with a product that is either
- Much more like the existing iPods - we've seen some patents showing touch screen scroll wheels for example.
- Completely different to the iPhone...
They'd be foolish to produce an iPod that looked exactly like an iPhone - they need brand differentiation...
Has Digitimes ever gotten a rumor right?
they have been hit and miss but mostly hit recently.
Actually they've done very well lately. Especially with Leopard release when everybody AND APPLE denied reports that Leopard is delayed , digitimes stood by their reports and said October release.
The Leopard delay was the only thing they "predicted" correctly. Apple then said IN RESPONSE to the DigiTimes report that it would not be delayed. A week or two later, they retracted that statement and officially announced the October roll-out date for Leopard.
Why would Apple deny the delay if they were just going to confirm it two weeks later? That makes no sense and only makes them look stupid. If Apple had decided concretely that they were going to push back until October they would have said something to the effect of, "We always plan to hit our target dates but occasionally we take more time than previously thought to get our projects perfected. We'll keep you informed if we decide to do this regarding Leopard."
They didn't though. They flat out denied it. That leads me to think that they had no concrete plans to delay. There was no "DigiTimes standing their ground." They may have heard a rumor, bit at it, like they always do, and this time they actually happened to be right.
If you report every rumor you hear, eventually you will be right.
-Clive
Oh, it'll most definately be touch interfaced. Let's think about it and use the iPhone as an example. They have created in the iPhone a whole new way to work with your music. They have also integrated coverflow. The touch interface where you can flick your finger across and stop scrolling with a touch is superior to the wheel on current iPods. Once you try it on an iPhone you'll see how good it is.
Also, it's really expected that the next generation iPod will have a larger screen. The touch wheel needs to take a lot of room. There were all kinds of mockups of virtual touch-screen wheels but that would be pathetic compared to the solution they came up with for the iPhone. Another point is that if it's going to have OS X, it doesn't make any sense to stick with the small screen. I mean why even bother?
So, in my book, an OS X running iPod guarantees a large screen which also guarantees a touch interface.
Apple has hired on additional engineers in some key areas that hint at the multitouch technology becoming the ubiquitous next-gen interface in most of their products.
First there's the addition of panel engineers outside of the iPhone team whose job it will be to work on larger multitouch surfaces. Then there's what appears to be the formation of a "Mobile Mac" business unit within Apple, and a Manager of Mobile Mac Architecture, which is decidedly aimed at developing a product line of portable computing/communications platforms.
Also is the fact that Apple acquired Fingerworks, a company that developed multitouch interfaces... In order for Apple to justify this acquisition, it has got to be for more than a narrow purpose...e.g. iPhone product line only.
In talking with a former Apple product engineer who was around at the time Jobs returned to Apple, he is very keen on the fact that the iPhone uses an ARM processor. ARM is a joint venture between Apple and other partners which makes designs for processors specifically for mobile communications platforms. The Newton/e-Mate used an ARM processor and was Apple's first, but poorly organized, attempt at getting into the mobile computing/communcations (e.g. PDA) market.
My colleague also pointed out that Apple's product development typically involves the introduction of a "feeler" product (e.g. 1st gen iPod) with a small, focused set of features, designed to elicit feedback from the market on a given concept that Apple's been toying with. iPhone is just that... Multitouch is the concept and they're trying to gauge public reaction to it to help shape how they use it in future products.
After 1st Gen iPod came Nano, and Shuffle, iPod Photo, iPod Video, etc. iPhone is more than likely not the flagship product... but the feeler product, after which both smaller and larger implementations of the multitouch technology will take hold.
I think we're likely to see 3G/HSDPA or even 4G/WiMax-enabled ultra-portables with multitouch technology that lie somewhere between a PDA and a tablet computer in terms of size.
Another suggestion regarding how far Apple wants to go with Multitouch is not only Microsoft's reaction, i.e. to announce their entry into the multitouch game, but also the fact that many of Leopard's design enhancements seem ideally suited for a multitouch input device rather than conventional mouse navigation.
A great example of one feature in particular is Stacks... Stacks is really a resurrection of Piles, a project that began in the early 1990's which outlined the ability to expand stacks of documents to see their contents, be able to select documents in the expanded view, and then have them collapse back into a stack on mouse-off. Piles was specifically targeted at use in mobile computing, e.g. Newton/eMate. However, the Newton project was killed and then Piles laid dormant for more than ten years though patents existed off of which they are now capitalizing.
Piles, Coverflow, Spaces, Time Machine, etc. look EXTREMELY suited for multitouch in which navigation through three dimensions/axes can be extraordinarily intuitive and far easier than with a mouse.
Multitouch is, in my opinion, the mother of "killer apps"... bound to redefine the graphical user interface in the most significant way since the introduction of the Macintosh. Part of the challenge that drives the need for multitouch is the growth of the desktop... when you had maybe 5-6 personal folders, and maybe 100 files, conventional mouse and keyboard navigation were easy... but the mushrooming of this scenario to hundreds of folders and tens of thousands of files is exactly what prompted features like Spotlight.
The current standard user interface is no longer doing the trick for quick and simple navigation through your mess of content. That is where Multitouch can fly... by putting you directly in contact with the content of your desktop, you can navigate through data in three dimensions very quickly, as intuitively as you would move around real objects in real space (thanks to some ingenious little "physics" quirks ... e.g. "rubberbanding", variable scroll momentum dictated by the force and speed of the gesture, etc.) and employ simpler "gesturing" that will execute multiple commands in one intuitive handstroke, instead of a series of clicks and keystrokes... thereby greatly reducing the time it takes you to find what you're looking for. Simpler commands executing more complex instructions = efficiency gain.
Note that insiders say that iPhone's forthcoming file management system will be like Leopard's... with Coverflow and probably Stacks... and even now nowhere to be found is there a single traditional finder with nested folders, a command line prompt, or, most notably... not a single clunky series of nested dropdown menus.
These design factors are not merely an "accident"... they're reworking the whole concept toward a better design.
Furthermore, I think that AppleTV, that thing Steve Jobs calls a "hobby" is a project that while not quite ready for "prime time" is acting as a testbed for some later plans they have...
Back when Jobs came on board, he started the concept of the "digital hub"... First there were applications that turned the computer not into the central focus of your lifestyle, but the digital hub to which other lifestyle devices would connect and find purpose... i.e. iPhoto, iTunes, iDVD, iMovie, etc.
Then iPod was introduced... Apple takes the digital hub one step further by introducing one of the most significant appliances to be part of that ecosystem.
Now iPhone and AppleTV are introducing degrees of technological convergence that take the digital hub concept to new dimensions... the LAN and WAN. AppleTV bridges your LAN with your home entertainment. iPhone bridges you with the world. And it's possible iPhone may even end up having the ability (through mere software updates) to act as a Coverflow Remote, giving you the ability to navigate and control AppleTV and its LAN constituents, and queue up selections for viewing on your home entertainment system via AppleTV.
What is the next step in branching out the digital hub? LAN-WAN interconnectivity. Bridging your home network with you on the go in a more elegant manner than clunky VPN software or SSH, remote access, etc. and doing so without being tethered to 802.11 wi-fi or a landline.
Imagine driving the kids to see Grandma and you forgot to load their favorite movie on our iPhone... no problem. The car's built-in navigation/entertainment console happens to be a Mobile Mac with 4G/WiMax and multiple multitouch interfaces in the dash and headrests... Kids punch up the user-friendly touchscreen in the headrest, it communicates over a wireless carrier to your LAN, talks to some AppleTV-like device on the network which locates the file on whichever computer it might be stored on, and streams the video back to the car.
This is the kind of technological convergence that makes the "computing" part of computers so transparent... the kind of elegance Apple is shooting for... and if I can think of it it's not hard to imagine that their much more intelligent product people are probably already testing prototypes as we speak.
so if we're dropping some of the more expensive features (cough-telphony-cough-Goggle Maps-cough) and replacing NAND with hard drives, how does anyone come to the conclusion that the price must stay high?
Drop a $5 phone chip plus maybe Apple is paying a few pennies/license for Google Maps. Replacing NAND with higher capacity hard drives is probably a break even. So, cutting $5.10 from the cost of the iPhone saves how much on the consumer end?
That's why I said "cancel your contract." There are several methods of using an phoneless-iphone, listed here.
I gotta learn to research more. The apple knowledge mojo in this place makes me want to not comment.
Sir, I stand (sit) corrected.
simotanious ipod/imac release? cause the g5 imac was bassed on the ipod, the new imac/new ipod?????
September is iPod month. Mark my words: the 11th the new lineup will arrive based on the previous two years' announcements.
July 31st will see the new iMacs, and hopefully mac mini if there is a SE. Though I realize all of these analysts are saying no more mac mini, eliminating the iMac 17" and the mac mini at the same time would be a huge step, and I think a little too much.
I think the mac mini would be fine if they just give it a substantial upgrade. Apple has enough money not to charge an incredible overhead on it; if they lower the price and make a smaller profit on them than they already do, the mac mini should see renewed interest.
Anyway, no new iPods until September 11.
-=|Mgkwho
The Leopard delay was the only thing they "predicted" correctly. Apple then said IN RESPONSE to the DigiTimes report that it would not be delayed. A week or two later, they retracted that statement and officially announced the October roll-out date for Leopard.
Why would Apple deny the delay if they were just going to confirm it two weeks later? That makes no sense and only makes them look stupid. If Apple had decided concretely that they were going to push back until October they would have said something to the effect of, "We always plan to hit our target dates but occasionally we take more time than previously thought to get our projects perfected. We'll keep you informed if we decide to do this regarding Leopard."
They didn't though. They flat out denied it. That leads me to think that they had no concrete plans to delay. There was no "DigiTimes standing their ground." They may have heard a rumor, bit at it, like they always do, and this time they actually happened to be right.
If you report every rumor you hear, eventually you will be right.
-Clive
you know what happened to Apple stock when Apple actually acknowledged the delay? it went down almost 4-5%. that's what Apple feared about.
Nice!!
simotanious ipod/imac release? cause the g5 imac was bassed on the ipod, the new imac/new ipod?????
Look at the left side of that "ipod"... whoever faked that image in Photoshop doesn't grasp the concept of depth perspective because the matte they used to create the false image of a full-screen doesn't angle in with the left side of that iPod casing.
"Pretty mediocre photographic fakery," Dr. Emmett Brown - Back to the Future
you know what happened to Apple stock when Apple actually acknowledged the delay? it went down almost 4-5%. that's what Apple feared about.
And that was maybe 15-20% ago... before the iPhone came out. Now the stock is at 132-133... about 20 points higher than where it was when the Leopard delay was announced.
So there you are.
The rumor sounds more than logical. With the iPhone establishing a new design standard anything less in a new iPod design would fall short - something Steve J doesn't like to see.
Two questions are on my mind - first, will it have a hard drive? I hope so, even if it may make the iPod just a little bit thicker. The second is will it basically be a stripped down iPhone? That design is so stunning that I find it hard to believe that Steve J will move too far from it.
Hopefully they will come out with two models - the basic iPod and an iPod with the internet features - basically the iPhone without the phone. It might piss ATT off a little, but I think it would sell like crazy.
I don't think an iPod will have a Hard drive because it would take too long to boot up. The iPhone takes 5-10 seconds to boot and that's all solid state. It would take much longer on a slow spinning 1.8" HDD.
I think their time-frame is a little aggressive. October is more likely (even November). And I'm still not entirely convinced that the 6Gen iPod will have the touch screen. Apple may want to sit on the iPhone for a little longer to entice more people to go pick-up one as their contracts expire.
But there is no doubt that the iPod needs a re-fresh; and while I think that Nano could do with just a memory up-grade this year, the full-sized iPod is essentially unchanged in the past two years. It's a good machine, but like the iMac, it's time for something new to look at.
Edit: Wally beat me to the punch...
They are.. therefore they ideally will start delivering the Xmas season line-up by end of September at the latest in order to fill and educate the retail storefronts as well as maximize the publicity for a strong Christmas selling season. Of course they can deliver later - but they are only cutting the season for the strongest sales of the year if they do and that is a SIN in CE Retail. The point being that Apple will not deliberately delay introducing a Xmas hot item beyond September if they are following a CE creed.
I agree.
OK, but in your idea, you remove <$15 worth of communication chips and add $100 in mass storage hardware. Plus Apple gets $$$ from AT&T for the iPhone. Sorry, I don't see that being cheaper than the iPhone either.
since the R&D is done, and the cost of components goes down constantly, why not use the same components that you're already manufacturing? what's the total component price of the iPhone in today's dollars? $220?
swap the 8 gigs of flash for an 80 gig HDD and charge $399? [i don't know the component cost for 80gig drives vs. 8gigs of flash...]