And real web designers use Flash. Flash is the whore house of the internet; nothing but eye catching fluff that will give you nothing substantial but try to empty your wallet at the same time.
You are getting a full browser by all 'real' definitions of the word. Windows users don't say theu aren't getting a 'real browser' because they haven't installed QuictkTime.
Last I heard, Flash 7 is pure crap and only runs on the ARM CPU. There is no Flash 9 for the ARM CPU. On top of that, Flash 9 for OS X Tiger is pretty bad all around. Adobe has a lot of work to do to get Flash functional on the Mac much less the iPhone. Furthermore, Flash is software solution. Id est, any Flash site will drain you battery quite rapidly.
Adobe really needs to come up with a Flash chipset updated via firmware if it wants to keep it's Flash monopoly into the next decade. This would render pages faster and use much less power.
No offense, but this all sounds like Apple apologist crap. While it may all basically be true in principle, the fact is that many websites use Flash and that many websites are also rendered useless without Flash (even if they shouldn't be). And Flash is far more widely used than Quicktime, so I would almost consider a browser without Flash not a "real browser." Maybe Flash would rapidly drain the battery, but it should still be available on the iPhone/iPod Touch as an option even if it's turned off by default.
Flash is the whore house of the internet; nothing but eye catching fluff that will give you nothing substantial but try to empty your wallet at the same time.
Lots of "real" websites use Flash brilliantly as a means to display complex, animated technical information. Just because the sites you choose to visit only use it for pop-ups and fluff ads doesn't make it a evil tool used only by "whores." Perhaps you need to broaden your internet experience a bit.
I'm a little perturbed that you can't add calendar items with iPod touch. To me that's a deal breaker. I'd buy it sooner than later if it had this functionality and ditch my Palm. Guess not now.
My god people make to much out of memory, is it so hard to create playlists. I've had an iTunes from day one, and have most of my CDs (at least everyone I've needed to listen to in the last 10 years) on my iTunes and its still only takes up 5.18GB (which is probably far more than your average user). Now I know video takes up a ton of space, but seriously why would you need to carry that much around, just sync what you need. Thats what I've been doing with my iPhone and its not been a problem.
If you need more than 16GB of space your a pack rat, and its a joke cause you probably don't listen/watch even 10% of what you have in your collection.
And real web designers use Flash. Flash is the whore house of the internet; nothing but eye catching fluff that will give you nothing substantial but try to empty your wallet at the same time.
You can compare, on the fly, several stocks at the same time and set arbitrary timelines by moving or lengthening the slider. I don't know what other common web technology can do that. There are other sites that do similar things too.
I think Quicktime had that sort of potential, but Apple really dropped the ball on that one, repeatedly, it's almost as if they push it back in time farther everytime.
Quote:
You are getting a full browser by all 'real' definitions of the word. Windows users don't say theu aren't getting a 'real browser' because they haven't installed QuictkTime.
That's just silly, because Flash has about 99% penetration on web-capable computers and devices, Quicktime has 50%. Flash is a de-facto part of the web experience, whether or not it's always used towards good ends.
MacWorld did a video first look and one interesting thing they pointed out is that you can't add events to the Touch calendar as you can in the iPhone. Weird.
That was a nice service for us "complainers" who plan to wait until Apple (re)implements this feature into the Touch. Thanks, Macworld.
If you need more than 16GB of space your a pack rat, and its a joke cause you probably don't listen/watch even 10% of what you have in your collection.
I don't think that's necessarily true, I have at least twice that, but I'm more than happy with a 4GB first gen nano, and my 1GB nano has proven to be quite serviceable too. I use smart playlists to make iTunes put in new songs to replace the ones that were played.
The need to carry ones entire collection around is kind of a psychological one. In terms of music, 16GB is maybe 20x more music than one can listen to on a charge, and the excess gives you plenty to skip and plenty of room for videos too. iTunes can easily change out that much data while charging too.
I think the Porsche analogy is that demanding 80GB capacity would be equivalent to demanding a large enough gas tank to do a US coast-to-coast road trip on one fill-up.
If you need more than 16GB of space your a pack rat, and its a joke cause you probably don't listen/watch even 10% of what you have in your collection.
It's a wonder to me how easily people resort to name-calling when civil transaction of opposing views would do just as well.
I have 18 GB of music, videos, and spoken word on my Mac, and I reject your characterization. In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn I'm within one standard deviation of the mean.
What do you mean you cannot use FireWire with your iPods? I use Firewire for my 4G 20gb iPod that just died on me, and my girlfriends Mini... I personally think Firewire is faster and better than USB. Plus you get higher wattage via Firewire than you would with USB, so charging your iPods/iPhones would be faster.
Firewire was dropped starting with the first gen nano and 5th gen iPod. No newer iPod will sync using Firewire.
I've never really noticed a charge speed difference either way. It was kind of a big deal when Apple switched over because a good share of their Mac installed base only had USB 1.1. That's not the case anymore, the argument's long dead and mostly pointless now.
Uuuuuhhhhh, it's so very tempting, but useless for me without a VPN client with decent IPSec support. I don't think it even comes with the iPhone's VPN, which isn't enough for lots of university networks anyways. When someone jailbreaks this sucker and releases a native VPN client with full Cisco compatibility (isn't that what Cisco demanded during the naming controversy?), I'll grab one instantly.
I asked for one specifically by name in the San Francisco store on the 12th and the (12 yr old) store employee told me that they wouldn't have them for several weeks. He said that was Apple's MO; i.e. announce something new but not ship it for several weeks. I tried to explain to him that this was a bit unusual for them but he would hear nothing of it. I let it drop at that, realizing he hadn't been born yet when I saw my first Mac. Big mistake, I should have been more persistent and talked to someone else. I'm sure someone must have known their arrival was imminent. Maybe I'll try at another store instead of waiting for the one I pre-ordered on the 5th.
I have 18 GB of music, videos, and spoken word on my Mac, and I reject your characterization. In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn I'm within one standard deviation of the mean.
I personally think you're very much in the minority, but even with that much (btw what % of that is video), why the need to have every bit with you at all times, or the aversion to simply be able to manage it through playlists and simple syncs. Of the 50+ iPod owners I know, not one (even audiophiles and DJ's) have over 10GB of music or spoken word. Video of course is a different animal taken up an exorbitant amount of room, but I just cant see a reason you would need to have a whole library of video on your iPod/iPhone.
BTW, sorry your so sensitive about name calling, I really didn't think what I said would be offensive to anyone just their narrow views. The point was to create a heated debate which is exactly what I have accomplished.
i admit to having a little bit of housecleaning to do, but i have basically 60 GB of music/podcasts in my itunes (mostly in either 320 or Apple Lossless).
that said, i am very tempted by the new nano. i do think it would help me create much better playlists.
My god people make to much out of memory, is it so hard to create playlists. I've had an iTunes from day one, and have most of my CDs (at least everyone I've needed to listen to in the last 10 years) on my iTunes and its still only takes up 5.18GB (which is probably far more than your average user). Now I know video takes up a ton of space, but seriously why would you need to carry that much around, just sync what you need. Thats what I've been doing with my iPhone and its not been a problem.
If you need more than 16GB of space your a pack rat, and its a joke cause you probably don't listen/watch even 10% of what you have in your collection.
My 3rd gen 15gb is full. I have had to take off the entire Beatles and JS Bach collections and park them on the HD of my wifes computer. Even then, I have no more than about 1/3 of my CD collection ripped. I need a lot more than 16gb.
I listen to music rather than watch TV. I use smart playlists so I can play stuff with low play counts and cycle through stuff I may not have chosen in a while. Most of the time I have it on random play. I might need 50-60gb before you even mention video.
A lot depends on the bit rate you rip at. I use 224 kbps AAC so the files take up more space than 128.
I frequently delete stuff I think I might not wish to hear again, just to make room for new stuff.
They should combine the Touch and 160gb classic - then you would have something, but as it is, the Touch is a cripple in my book - pretty, but fatally flawed.
Firewire was dropped starting with the first gen nano and 5th gen iPod. No newer iPod will sync using Firewire.
I've never really noticed a charge speed difference either way. It was kind of a big deal when Apple switched over because a good share of their Mac installed base only had USB 1.1. That's not the case anymore, the argument's long dead and mostly pointless now.
Well I still use a Ti Powerbook so it IS still an issue with me.
BTW, sorry your so sensitive about name calling, I really didn't think what I said would be offensive to anyone just their narrow views. The point was to create a heated debate which is exactly what I have accomplished.
Wait, aren't you supposed to create heated debate by arguing the facts rather than engaging in ad hominem attacks? Sorry, but I think that's seriously misusing the word debate. Try mudslinging.
On the actual subject, I don't think it's fair to discount video as a "different story." One of the major selling points of this device is having this great display that makes video truly watchable. As you've stated, video takes up a lot of room, which means storage is critical. The Touch just doesn't have enough space to truly make that gorgeous screen useful. Now, I think it is unfair for people to criticize Apple for not including enough space, because if they made this a hard drive device the same people would complain about thickness and battery life, and probably the speed of the OS as well. Truth is, flash technology is just not yet advanced enough to make our dream device possible. In a few years, largely due to Apple selling a ton of flash-based iPods, we'll see high-storage flash options that are cost effective and true convergence devices. For now, we have to live with technological constraints and appreciate devices for what they are, which in this case is a really nice portable browser and media player but not, like the classic, a portable media center.
Comments
And real web designers use Flash. Flash is the whore house of the internet; nothing but eye catching fluff that will give you nothing substantial but try to empty your wallet at the same time.
You are getting a full browser by all 'real' definitions of the word. Windows users don't say theu aren't getting a 'real browser' because they haven't installed QuictkTime.
Last I heard, Flash 7 is pure crap and only runs on the ARM CPU. There is no Flash 9 for the ARM CPU. On top of that, Flash 9 for OS X Tiger is pretty bad all around. Adobe has a lot of work to do to get Flash functional on the Mac much less the iPhone. Furthermore, Flash is software solution. Id est, any Flash site will drain you battery quite rapidly.
Adobe really needs to come up with a Flash chipset updated via firmware if it wants to keep it's Flash monopoly into the next decade. This would render pages faster and use much less power.
No offense, but this all sounds like Apple apologist crap. While it may all basically be true in principle, the fact is that many websites use Flash and that many websites are also rendered useless without Flash (even if they shouldn't be). And Flash is far more widely used than Quicktime, so I would almost consider a browser without Flash not a "real browser." Maybe Flash would rapidly drain the battery, but it should still be available on the iPhone/iPod Touch as an option even if it's turned off by default.
Edit: never mind, I found it in the manual, and you can set a photo as a wallpaper.
Flash is the whore house of the internet; nothing but eye catching fluff that will give you nothing substantial but try to empty your wallet at the same time.
Lots of "real" websites use Flash brilliantly as a means to display complex, animated technical information. Just because the sites you choose to visit only use it for pop-ups and fluff ads doesn't make it a evil tool used only by "whores." Perhaps you need to broaden your internet experience a bit.
It'd be nice if it had a built in speaker, too.
It's like a Porsche with a 1 gallon fuel tank
My god people make to much out of memory, is it so hard to create playlists. I've had an iTunes from day one, and have most of my CDs (at least everyone I've needed to listen to in the last 10 years) on my iTunes and its still only takes up 5.18GB (which is probably far more than your average user). Now I know video takes up a ton of space, but seriously why would you need to carry that much around, just sync what you need. Thats what I've been doing with my iPhone and its not been a problem.
If you need more than 16GB of space your a pack rat, and its a joke cause you probably don't listen/watch even 10% of what you have in your collection.
And real web designers use Flash. Flash is the whore house of the internet; nothing but eye catching fluff that will give you nothing substantial but try to empty your wallet at the same time.
It's not entirely useless.
Take a look at the flash applet here:
http://finance.google.com/finance?q=AAPL
You can compare, on the fly, several stocks at the same time and set arbitrary timelines by moving or lengthening the slider. I don't know what other common web technology can do that. There are other sites that do similar things too.
I think Quicktime had that sort of potential, but Apple really dropped the ball on that one, repeatedly, it's almost as if they push it back in time farther everytime.
You are getting a full browser by all 'real' definitions of the word. Windows users don't say theu aren't getting a 'real browser' because they haven't installed QuictkTime.
That's just silly, because Flash has about 99% penetration on web-capable computers and devices, Quicktime has 50%. Flash is a de-facto part of the web experience, whether or not it's always used towards good ends.
MacWorld did a video first look and one interesting thing they pointed out is that you can't add events to the Touch calendar as you can in the iPhone. Weird.
That was a nice service for us "complainers" who plan to wait until Apple (re)implements this feature into the Touch. Thanks, Macworld.
If you need more than 16GB of space your a pack rat, and its a joke cause you probably don't listen/watch even 10% of what you have in your collection.
I don't think that's necessarily true, I have at least twice that, but I'm more than happy with a 4GB first gen nano, and my 1GB nano has proven to be quite serviceable too. I use smart playlists to make iTunes put in new songs to replace the ones that were played.
The need to carry ones entire collection around is kind of a psychological one. In terms of music, 16GB is maybe 20x more music than one can listen to on a charge, and the excess gives you plenty to skip and plenty of room for videos too. iTunes can easily change out that much data while charging too.
I think the Porsche analogy is that demanding 80GB capacity would be equivalent to demanding a large enough gas tank to do a US coast-to-coast road trip on one fill-up.
If you need more than 16GB of space your a pack rat, and its a joke cause you probably don't listen/watch even 10% of what you have in your collection.
It's a wonder to me how easily people resort to name-calling when civil transaction of opposing views would do just as well.
I have 18 GB of music, videos, and spoken word on my Mac, and I reject your characterization. In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn I'm within one standard deviation of the mean.
Anyone else want to bite?
What do you mean you cannot use FireWire with your iPods? I use Firewire for my 4G 20gb iPod that just died on me, and my girlfriends Mini... I personally think Firewire is faster and better than USB. Plus you get higher wattage via Firewire than you would with USB, so charging your iPods/iPhones would be faster.
Firewire was dropped starting with the first gen nano and 5th gen iPod. No newer iPod will sync using Firewire.
I've never really noticed a charge speed difference either way. It was kind of a big deal when Apple switched over because a good share of their Mac installed base only had USB 1.1. That's not the case anymore, the argument's long dead and mostly pointless now.
Also can you see Flip4Mac doing codecs to play WMA's
And Realplayer?
I have 18 GB of music, videos, and spoken word on my Mac, and I reject your characterization. In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn I'm within one standard deviation of the mean.
I personally think you're very much in the minority, but even with that much (btw what % of that is video), why the need to have every bit with you at all times, or the aversion to simply be able to manage it through playlists and simple syncs. Of the 50+ iPod owners I know, not one (even audiophiles and DJ's) have over 10GB of music or spoken word. Video of course is a different animal taken up an exorbitant amount of room, but I just cant see a reason you would need to have a whole library of video on your iPod/iPhone.
BTW, sorry your so sensitive about name calling, I really didn't think what I said would be offensive to anyone just their narrow views. The point was to create a heated debate which is exactly what I have accomplished.
that said, i am very tempted by the new nano. i do think it would help me create much better playlists.
My god people make to much out of memory, is it so hard to create playlists. I've had an iTunes from day one, and have most of my CDs (at least everyone I've needed to listen to in the last 10 years) on my iTunes and its still only takes up 5.18GB (which is probably far more than your average user). Now I know video takes up a ton of space, but seriously why would you need to carry that much around, just sync what you need. Thats what I've been doing with my iPhone and its not been a problem.
If you need more than 16GB of space your a pack rat, and its a joke cause you probably don't listen/watch even 10% of what you have in your collection.
My 3rd gen 15gb is full. I have had to take off the entire Beatles and JS Bach collections and park them on the HD of my wifes computer. Even then, I have no more than about 1/3 of my CD collection ripped. I need a lot more than 16gb.
I listen to music rather than watch TV. I use smart playlists so I can play stuff with low play counts and cycle through stuff I may not have chosen in a while. Most of the time I have it on random play. I might need 50-60gb before you even mention video.
A lot depends on the bit rate you rip at. I use 224 kbps AAC so the files take up more space than 128.
I frequently delete stuff I think I might not wish to hear again, just to make room for new stuff.
They should combine the Touch and 160gb classic - then you would have something, but as it is, the Touch is a cripple in my book - pretty, but fatally flawed.
Firewire was dropped starting with the first gen nano and 5th gen iPod. No newer iPod will sync using Firewire.
I've never really noticed a charge speed difference either way. It was kind of a big deal when Apple switched over because a good share of their Mac installed base only had USB 1.1. That's not the case anymore, the argument's long dead and mostly pointless now.
Well I still use a Ti Powerbook so it IS still an issue with me.
Am I the only one who hopes the 1 button will disappear on future models?.... Also, is anyone else a bit sad that there are no more white iPods?
Yes.
No.
BTW, sorry your so sensitive about name calling, I really didn't think what I said would be offensive to anyone just their narrow views. The point was to create a heated debate which is exactly what I have accomplished.
Wait, aren't you supposed to create heated debate by arguing the facts rather than engaging in ad hominem attacks? Sorry, but I think that's seriously misusing the word debate. Try mudslinging.
On the actual subject, I don't think it's fair to discount video as a "different story." One of the major selling points of this device is having this great display that makes video truly watchable. As you've stated, video takes up a lot of room, which means storage is critical. The Touch just doesn't have enough space to truly make that gorgeous screen useful. Now, I think it is unfair for people to criticize Apple for not including enough space, because if they made this a hard drive device the same people would complain about thickness and battery life, and probably the speed of the OS as well. Truth is, flash technology is just not yet advanced enough to make our dream device possible. In a few years, largely due to Apple selling a ton of flash-based iPods, we'll see high-storage flash options that are cost effective and true convergence devices. For now, we have to live with technological constraints and appreciate devices for what they are, which in this case is a really nice portable browser and media player but not, like the classic, a portable media center.