Upcoming iPods - Sep 2007 - Educated Guess

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 82
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bnsmmr View Post


    iPod Touch



    iPhone without the phone. New top line of iPods. High capacity and hard drive based. Includes WiFi, camera, etc., just no Edge or phone. This is an important cog in Apple's grand scheme to quickly grow Safari marketshare. Shared platform with iPhone, including upcoming software additions, widgets, features, etc. that come to iPhone. Expensive with generous margin built-in. iPods have been introduced as high as $599, and I could see this selling in that range. I don't buy the arguments that this would need to be priced below the iPhone, nor do I believe that it would "cannibalize" the iPhone. The phone contract is a HUGE differentiator; that is a clear separator in the potential audiences for these devices. (I'll take two of these, please.)



    Ben



    I don't see a need for a product like this. Apple are very strategic about their iPod line and every device has a distinct purpose and I don't see where an iPod touch would fit in



    *Wifi is something we won't see in an iPod in near future. The iPhone has WiFi but you can't use it for anything other than surfing over Wifi. An iPod with that feature would heavily affect the iPhone since there are WiFi network in many places around big cities.



    *The Camera would also affect the iPhone and I can't see how a camera will add to the experience since it has got nothing to do with music/film. The feature would just make the device bigger and more expensive.



    * The hard drive thing is also an issue since HDDs will be phased out by spring of 2009. The price of SSDs are decreasing, the iPod Nano will this year get it's capacity bumped up to 16GB. Next year it will be bumped up to 32, the iPod G6 will in the near future be equipped with SSD or same NAND chips as the Nano, and before you know it size with only be the difference between the Nano and bigger iPod. Further more the bigger iPod will itself get a touch screen since that is clearly the direction the industry is pointing at. Simply put the bigger iPod will inevitably becoming an iPod touch within a year or so.
  • Reply 22 of 82
    buddhabuddha Posts: 386member
    Apple won't put cameras on iPods because many businesses do not allow cameras in their workplace.
  • Reply 23 of 82
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,841member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by homeboy87 View Post


    *Wifi is something we won't see in an iPod in near future. The iPhone has WiFi but you can't use it for anything other than surfing over Wifi. An iPod with that feature would heavily affect the iPhone since there are WiFi network in many places around big cities.



    WiFi could be put to excellent use - wireless synching, using the iPod as a remote control for AppleTV or Airport Express or your Mac, that sort of thing.



    The idea that a WiFi enabled device is a threat to a mobile phone is laughable.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by homeboy87 View Post


    I can't see how a camera will add to the experience since it has got nothing to do with music/film. The feature would just make the device bigger and more expensive.



    Agreed. A camera in an iPod is utterly pointless.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by homeboy87 View Post


    * The hard drive thing is also an issue since HDDs will be phased out by spring of 2009.



    Nonsense. HDDs will probably always be cheaper than solid-state memory, per GB. The current capacity of the HDD iPod is 80 GB, it'll be several years before that amount of solid-state memory is cost-effective. By which time, there'll be 320 GB 1.8" HDDs enabling people to carry around their entire music library in Apple Lossless format instead of AAC, or carry their entire music and video collections on one device.
  • Reply 24 of 82
    irelandireland Posts: 17,794member
  • Reply 25 of 82
    That looks nice, but... if the Nano stays the same height, the click wheel will be way too low on the body. It's already pretty low so it's not that easy to use with one hand. If it were all the way at the bottom edge, it would be impossible to hold and scroll with one hand.



    A bigger screen might make up for that, though. I'm ok with a lot of problems stemming from iPhone's lack of physical buttons since that gorgeous screen makes up for it all.
  • Reply 26 of 82
    irelandireland Posts: 17,794member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nevenmrgan View Post


    That looks nice, but... if the Nano stays the same height, the click wheel will be way too low on the body. It's already pretty low so it's not that easy to use with one hand. If it were all the way at the bottom edge, it would be impossible to hold and scroll with one hand.



    A bigger screen might make up for that, though. I'm ok with a lot of problems stemming from iPhone's lack of physical buttons since that gorgeous screen makes up for it all.



    What click wheel? This is a 3G touch-screen iPod nano. The image on the right is proportionate to the one on the left, and it's the image of the full product, i.e. it doesn't have a click wheel.
  • Reply 27 of 82
    bnsmmrbnsmmr Posts: 7member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    Not quite. It's possible, but it is somewhat (IMHO) pointless. There are competitors out there with smaller screens that also play video.



    The sentiment here seems to be that running video on the current size nano screen would suck and I tend to agree with this. Of all the things I suggested in my run-down above, I think this is probably the weakest item. I included it, though, as one of the running rumors. And it would widen the audience for iTunes video content, which strategically makes sense for Apple.



    I was thinking that in the slight chance that a touch-screen interface comes to the iPod this season, it would start out as sort of a high-end exclusive. Then I saw the Nano mock-up posted by Ireland. Not sure if that is realistic from a cost/manufacturing standpoint, but it is a pretty compelling design for the Nano if within the realm of possibility.



    Ben
  • Reply 28 of 82
    bnsmmrbnsmmr Posts: 7member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by buddha View Post


    Apple won't put cameras on iPods because many businesses do not allow cameras in their workplace.



    This is like the argument that "Apple won't put cameras in their Mac Books Pros because many businesses do not allow cameras in their workplace." Or in the Mac Book. Or the iMac. Or the iPhone. Every single portable that Apple sells has a built-in camera, every phone, their main desktop offering, etc. - Apple may not include a camera on the iPod, but it doesn't look like this concern will be the thing that stops them.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    Agreed. A camera in an iPod is utterly pointless.



    Any more pointless than sticking one on an iPhone? Or on any mobile phone for that matter? The point is to have a camera that is always handy and built into whatever device you happen to already be carrying around with you all the time, so you can capture those unexpected moments.



    Plus, the iPod is already a photo viewer, so it has an established connection to photography. It could also sync your snaps back to iPhoto. If you've played with an iPhone, you've seen the great, widescreen, photo-viewing environment they've developed. It's a blast. Why be limited (as you currently are) to photos from your iPhoto library that you took in the past? Why not have the immediate experience of photos on the go? Plus, Apple already has the software and engineering developed in the iPhone. Who knows if it will happen, but I personally think there are plenty of compelling reasons for including one.



    Ben
  • Reply 29 of 82
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    Nonsense. HDDs will probably always be cheaper than solid-state memory, per GB. The current capacity of the HDD iPod is 80 GB, it'll be several years before that amount of solid-state memory is cost-effective. By which time, there'll be 320 GB 1.8" HDDs enabling people to carry around their entire music library in Apple Lossless format instead of AAC, or carry their entire music and video collections on one device.



    I predict that people will be predicting the near end of spinning disk drives for at least 10 more years. It won't happen until scientists run into a brick wall and cannot further increase data density. They still have a lot of breathing room with perpendicular recording and who knows what they will come up with next.
  • Reply 30 of 82
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    What click wheel? This is a 3G touch-screen iPod nano. The image on the right is proportionate to the one on the left, and it's the image of the full product, i.e. it doesn't have a click wheel.



    Oh... Heh.



    So, no home button, or any equivalent? If I want to pause, skip, or change the volume, I have to go through menus? Riiight...
  • Reply 31 of 82
    irelandireland Posts: 17,794member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nevenmrgan View Post


    Oh... Heh.



    So, no home button, or any equivalent? If I want to pause, skip, or change the volume, I have to go through menus? Riiight...



    I knew it was coming. Yes, no "home" button because there's no phone, no internet, and no widgets. And if you want to pause, skip and such you use the new built-in in-line remote - easy.
  • Reply 32 of 82
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Given Apple's past actions I would say that the next gen Nanos will use the next gen Flash from Samsung with double the density. Meaning that all models get twice the capacity with the exception of the Shuffle.



    In 2006 the followed mass production of the new 1Gb Samsung flash with the new nano. This year Samsung started mass production of the new 2Gb flash based on the 60nm process.
  • Reply 33 of 82
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    Nonsense. HDDs will probably always be cheaper than solid-state memory, per GB. The current capacity of the HDD iPod is 80 GB, it'll be several years before that amount of solid-state memory is cost-effective. By which time, there'll be 320 GB 1.8" HDDs enabling people to carry around their entire music library in Apple Lossless format instead of AAC, or carry their entire music and video collections on one device.



    1.8inch HDDs will be phased out. Just look at the 0.85inch drives which were used in the iPod mini in other DAPs a few years ago, they are totally obsolete now thank to NAND memory. The consumption of NAND chips is increasing with rocket speed and so is the price. Within 18 months there will be 32GB and 64GB DAPs flooding on the market.



    Yes HDDs will always be cheaper per GB but SSD has lower power consumption and faster read time. Further more they are much more reliable, since they won't die on you for no reason. Imagine an 320GB iPod experiencing an HDD failure ending up in you loosing all your content. Just look at the millions of people who have had to send in their or throw their iPods in the trash can because the HDD in their iPod has died on them. I've experienced that twice and it's not fun at all.



    Quality over quantity. I prefer a 32GB SSD ipod rather than an 80GB HDD iPod which can die on me at any time. SSD is the future. Apple has an exclusive deal with Apple and within two years they will have switched over to SSD kicking HDDs out the door.
  • Reply 34 of 82
    mrtotesmrtotes Posts: 760member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post






    Hopefully it will be a little more widescreen but this the best design Apple could do for the Nano 3G. I think it may have a little more casing on top and bottom so that the fingers holding it don't obsure the screen.



    I agree that you don't need the clutter of a Home button on such a simple device.



    Can't wait; I will be buying one. ;-)
  • Reply 35 of 82
    applepiapplepi Posts: 365member
    Shuffle

    Virtually unchanged. 2GB version available in black.



    Nano

    2" touch screen with video playback and video output via the headphone jack and dock. Priced at

    $150(4GB), $200(8GB) and $300(16GB). Aluminum with colors just like current line-up.



    Video

    3.5" touch screen with wifi, similar size and design as iphone but without the nice satin aluminum finish, silver frame or telephone capabilities, one solid color. One model priced at $399 for 80-120GB hard drive or possibly just 32GB flash.



    ---



    For anyone who thinks adding wifi to the video ipod is a bad idea, just look at the Zune. All Microsoft has to do is get smart enough to update the firmware to allow some convoluted way to get to internet explorer on the thing and suddenly it becomes a lot more sellable.I doubt Apple is going to release a next gen ipod video without wifi.Even though the Zune hasn't done much with it, Apple still has to watch their backs.



    The only thing I'm not sure about is if Apple wants to get rid of the click wheel altogether, if they do that means all ipod games need to find a new way to be played. unless they become strictly a 5G feature with 6G games to come.
  • Reply 36 of 82
    irelandireland Posts: 17,794member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mrtotes View Post


    Hopefully it will be a little more widescreen but this the best design Apple could do for the Nano 3G. I think it may have a little more casing on top and bottom so that the fingers holding it don't obsure the screen.



    I agree that you don't need the clutter of a Home button on such a simple device.



    I totally agree with the things you mentioned here, and I noticed them too last night, but I had to go. I have now adjusted the mock-up accordingly.



  • Reply 37 of 82
    I've got to say that I agree heartily with ApplePi -

    while I'd never want to watch a video on a tiny nano screen, the

    option to carry video & then plug into a hotel tv an watch would be

    truly useful, and probably prompt me to buy more stuff from the iTunes store.
  • Reply 38 of 82
    imickimick Posts: 351member
    My wish for a new Shuffle:

    4GB or larger

    Weather/sweat proof

    Same physical size

    Same controller (or similar controller with click-type buttons)

    Many colors to choose from



    Here's why:

    When running, or biking, I don't care about a screen. I just want music.

    I need to be able to skip a song that I don't feel like listening to, just by reaching down and clicking it.

    I need the controls to be activated by feel, and not by having to look at a screen to control it. The Shuffle does that now.



    "One more thing"... I would ideally like the 4GB version to cost about $19.99 and the 8GB version to be about $24.99. I can dream, right?
  • Reply 39 of 82
    mrtotesmrtotes Posts: 760member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    I totally agree with the things you mentioned here, and I noticed them too last night, but I had to go. I have now adjusted the mock-up accordingly.







    That's actually only very subtly different but looks great, the proprotions seem more natural! Thanks Ireland. I would have had a go myself but don't have Photoshop on this Win2K machine at work!



    Whilst video on a 3.5cm screen would be unbearable it would be acceptable on the approx 7cm screen Ireland has above. After all video is popular on current mobile phones many of which had lower res and smaller screens that this 3G mock-up.



    I could see features like Bluetooth earphones being a 6G iPod feature only whilst the Nano keeps wired earphones to help differenciate the product lines. This 3G Nano would probably be 4Gb and 8Gb (like the iPhone and the models it replaces) with a 16Gb version coming next year.
  • Reply 40 of 82
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,841member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by homeboy87 View Post


    Yes HDDs will always be cheaper per GB but SSD has lower power consumption and faster read time.



    They have lower seek time, but also lower throughput, so they are actually slower for block copying. So, synching your high capacity iPod for the first time would actually be slower for an SSD iPod. But I don't think that matters much.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by homeboy87 View Post


    Further more they are much more reliable, since they won't die on you for no reason. Imagine an 320GB iPod experiencing an HDD failure ending up in you loosing all your content.



    I don't think that's a good reason for not having a 320 GB iPod. The iPod shouldn't be the only place you are storing your content. When the iPod can have a 320 GB HDD, laptops will have around 640 GB, and desktops even more.





    Quote:

    I prefer a 32GB SSD ipod rather than an 80GB HDD iPod which can die on me at any time.



    Good for you. Get a 32 GB Nano then. I for one hope that Apple retain an HDD iPod that continues to increase in capacity, enabling, as I said before, the transition to Apple Lossless as the audio codec, or allowing for much larger amounts of video to be stored alongside the music library.
Sign In or Register to comment.