Limiting the touch model to flash memory makes sense but is kinda disappointing. I was worried the 8gb would be 399, thank god it's not. I have no idea what I want now, aside from the shuffle they all honestly have their pluses.
4gb nano and 149 is sweet, so it 80gb classic at 250, and 16gb at 399. Damn.
Not too sure about that... it will make my wife pretty darned happy; she is one of those who frequents our local Starbucks several times a week and loves the music.
I really thought they'd go with hard drives. A lot of people are going to feel cramped dropping from 60-80GB down to 16GB at most. That's really poor. If it had expandable flash storage it would future proof it a bit.
It has a lot of advantages though regarding weight, battery life and reliability. This will cut down Apple's warranty repairs on hard drives.
Overall, flash is the way of the future but Apple as usual are skating to where the puck will be long before it gets there.
Possibly it's a stepping stone regarding the uptake of flash media in general computers and it will ensure long-term market growth as the need for more storage beckons again. So next year we'll see 16-32GB and then 64GB+ which will be enough for using in computers.
I think it had to be flash though because they'd have to redesign the enclosure. From the pictures, it looks like they just took iphones and removed the phone parts. This should cut down manufacturing costs for both the ipod and iphone - same parts, same design, same OS.
And I'm so glad that wide ipod didn't turn out to be the ipod video otherwise it would have been terrible. As the nano, it looks fine and the price is good.
At last an Apple event that didn't turn out to be lame. Now to wait on one involving Mac hardware (which I guess the ipod technically is now as it runs OS X but you know what I mean).
Interesting. They moved to the new NAND for the iPod touch but perhaps not for the Nano at 4GB/8GB. Or maybe they did...won't know until someone opens one up. I guess if it were 8GB/16GB as well it would hurt iPod Touch sales too much although...$399 for the 16GB doesn't seem too bad to me. My wife's iPod (now classic) is only filled to 17GB with all our photos, all her songs and a couple movies loaded. I can live with that. Or more like she can as I'll inherit hers since I can only justify the iPod touch with "I got it for YOU so you could see the photos on a bigger screen!"
So now you have to choose between the Touch and the nano, size or interface?
And you still can't get a large hard drive iPod with a large screen?
I mean this is not rocket science.
I was really expecting the iPod touch to come in 80gb/160gb versions, and the new iPod nano to be a smaller iPod touch with a 2.5" screen and 8/16gb.
The current lineup really makes no sense to me at all. If you want to watch movies and TV, which do you buy? the touch with the larger screen or the classic with the larger hard drive?
If I want to watch a little bit of tv, and have something compact, but not as small as the shuffle, do i buy the touch to get the cooler interface, or the fat nano, so i can watch a bit of TV on an ugly, malproportioned device?
So now you have to choose between the Touch and the nano, size or interface?
And you still can't get a large hard drive iPod with a large screen?
I mean this is not rocket science.
I was really expecting the iPod touch to come in 80gb/160gb versions, and the new iPod nano to be a smaller iPod touch with a 2.5" screen and 8/16gb.
The current lineup really makes no sense to me at all. If you want to watch movies and TV, which do you buy? the touch with the larger screen or the classic with the larger hard drive?
If I want to watch a little bit of tv, and have something compact, but not as small as the shuffle, do i buy the touch to get the cooler interface, or the fat nano, so i can watch a bit of TV on an ugly, malproportioned device?
Which iPod am I?
i believe that the reason behind the small hard drives is to discourage downloading pirated movies. usually if you download movies the file size is big around 500 mb to 1 gb in general. if you get a video that's formated for the ipod it's like 100 mb or less. i believe that's the reason for the smaller hard drives. but who knows.
i believe that the reason behind the small hard drives is to discourage downloading pirated movies. usually if you download movies the file size is big around 500 mb to 1 gb in general. if you get a video that's formated for the ipod it's like 100 mb or less. i believe that's the reason for the smaller hard drives. but who knows.
I understand you have right to your opinion and assumtion but that is just way too retarded assumption. i mean , do you really think that or you just typed without thinking ?
i believe that the reason behind the small hard drives is to discourage downloading pirated movies. usually if you download movies the file size is big around 500 mb to 1 gb in general. if you get a video that's formated for the ipod it's like 100 mb or less. i believe that's the reason for the smaller hard drives. but who knows.
Okay given a finite space something has to give....
- The touch screen of the iPod Touch will clearly demand more juice than the iPod Classic... First of all it's bigger and second its touch...
- The average iPod user expects (nee DEMANDS) the iPod to play 24 hours on a single charge.
- Flash memory demands far less power (BUT) cost considerably more per GB when compared to the HDDs the iPod Classic uses today...
Mix all these facts up and out comes the only solution Apple could realistically offer... An iPod Touch that functions for apx 24 hours on a single charge with flash based storage. Don't worry as flash becomes even more ubiquitous (if thats possible) the storage space will continue to rise and with any luck, those tiny HDs found in the iPod Classic will continue to drop their power draw...
I understand you have right to your opinion and assumtion but that is just way too retarded assumption. i mean , do you really think that or you just typed without thinking ?
why wouldn't they just put a regular hard drive then. i bet that most people don't care if it's a tiny bit thicker ( like me ). it's just a guess. it's possible. apple is big in the movie industry.
why wouldn't they just put a regular hard drive then. i bet that most people don't care if it's a tiny bit thicker ( like me ). it's just a guess. it's possible. apple is big in the movie industry.
1st , they'd need to re-engineering the whole thing. 2nd they'd have to use huge ass battery to run both , power hungry HDD AND that huge display.
Also , "tiny bit thicker" ? You ever saw what iPods HDD look like compared to flash ? Its alot bigger than "tiny bit".
Comments
Limiting the touch model to flash memory makes sense but is kinda disappointing. I was worried the 8gb would be 399, thank god it's not. I have no idea what I want now, aside from the shuffle they all honestly have their pluses.
4gb nano and 149 is sweet, so it 80gb classic at 250, and 16gb at 399. Damn.
Just buy one of each and be happy.
Starbucks Feature= Lamest feature ever
Not too sure about that... it will make my wife pretty darned happy; she is one of those who frequents our local Starbucks several times a week and loves the music.
It has a lot of advantages though regarding weight, battery life and reliability. This will cut down Apple's warranty repairs on hard drives.
Overall, flash is the way of the future but Apple as usual are skating to where the puck will be long before it gets there.
Possibly it's a stepping stone regarding the uptake of flash media in general computers and it will ensure long-term market growth as the need for more storage beckons again. So next year we'll see 16-32GB and then 64GB+ which will be enough for using in computers.
I think it had to be flash though because they'd have to redesign the enclosure. From the pictures, it looks like they just took iphones and removed the phone parts. This should cut down manufacturing costs for both the ipod and iphone - same parts, same design, same OS.
And I'm so glad that wide ipod didn't turn out to be the ipod video otherwise it would have been terrible. As the nano, it looks fine and the price is good.
At last an Apple event that didn't turn out to be lame. Now to wait on one involving Mac hardware (which I guess the ipod technically is now as it runs OS X but you know what I mean).
I'm seriously considering going to the Apple Store and trading in my iPod nano (2G model 4 GB) for a 80 GB iPod classic.
Go for it man, you'd get 10x the storage at the same price!
Just buy one of each and be happy.
I am seriously considering that, but I must......exercise......self.......control.....
I am seriously considering that, but I must......exercise......self.......control.....
That is not the holiday spirit Steve wants you to have! Go on, spoil yourself.
I am soooooo getting both the new nano (for the wife,
That is not the holiday spirit Steve wants you to have! Go on, spoil yourself.
I am soooooo getting both the new nano (for the wife,
That's what I'll do! New nano (for my girlfriend
And you still can't get a large hard drive iPod with a large screen?
I mean this is not rocket science.
I was really expecting the iPod touch to come in 80gb/160gb versions, and the new iPod nano to be a smaller iPod touch with a 2.5" screen and 8/16gb.
The current lineup really makes no sense to me at all. If you want to watch movies and TV, which do you buy? the touch with the larger screen or the classic with the larger hard drive?
If I want to watch a little bit of tv, and have something compact, but not as small as the shuffle, do i buy the touch to get the cooler interface, or the fat nano, so i can watch a bit of TV on an ugly, malproportioned device?
Which iPod am I?
So now you have to choose between the Touch and the nano, size or interface?
And you still can't get a large hard drive iPod with a large screen?
I mean this is not rocket science.
I was really expecting the iPod touch to come in 80gb/160gb versions, and the new iPod nano to be a smaller iPod touch with a 2.5" screen and 8/16gb.
The current lineup really makes no sense to me at all. If you want to watch movies and TV, which do you buy? the touch with the larger screen or the classic with the larger hard drive?
If I want to watch a little bit of tv, and have something compact, but not as small as the shuffle, do i buy the touch to get the cooler interface, or the fat nano, so i can watch a bit of TV on an ugly, malproportioned device?
Which iPod am I?
i believe that the reason behind the small hard drives is to discourage downloading pirated movies. usually if you download movies the file size is big around 500 mb to 1 gb in general. if you get a video that's formated for the ipod it's like 100 mb or less. i believe that's the reason for the smaller hard drives. but who knows.
i believe that the reason behind the small hard drives is to discourage downloading pirated movies. usually if you download movies the file size is big around 500 mb to 1 gb in general. if you get a video that's formated for the ipod it's like 100 mb or less. i believe that's the reason for the smaller hard drives. but who knows.
I understand you have right to your opinion and assumtion but that is just way too retarded assumption. i mean , do you really think that or you just typed without thinking ?
i believe that the reason behind the small hard drives is to discourage downloading pirated movies. usually if you download movies the file size is big around 500 mb to 1 gb in general. if you get a video that's formated for the ipod it's like 100 mb or less. i believe that's the reason for the smaller hard drives. but who knows.
Okay given a finite space something has to give....
- The touch screen of the iPod Touch will clearly demand more juice than the iPod Classic... First of all it's bigger and second its touch...
- The average iPod user expects (nee DEMANDS) the iPod to play 24 hours on a single charge.
- Flash memory demands far less power (BUT) cost considerably more per GB when compared to the HDDs the iPod Classic uses today...
Mix all these facts up and out comes the only solution Apple could realistically offer... An iPod Touch that functions for apx 24 hours on a single charge with flash based storage. Don't worry as flash becomes even more ubiquitous (if thats possible) the storage space will continue to rise and with any luck, those tiny HDs found in the iPod Classic will continue to drop their power draw...
Dave
I understand you have right to your opinion and assumtion but that is just way too retarded assumption. i mean , do you really think that or you just typed without thinking ?
why wouldn't they just put a regular hard drive then. i bet that most people don't care if it's a tiny bit thicker ( like me ). it's just a guess. it's possible. apple is big in the movie industry.
Starbucks Feature= Lamest feature ever
It hits the hipsters where it hurts.®
why wouldn't they just put a regular hard drive then. i bet that most people don't care if it's a tiny bit thicker ( like me ). it's just a guess. it's possible. apple is big in the movie industry.
1st , they'd need to re-engineering the whole thing. 2nd they'd have to use huge ass battery to run both , power hungry HDD AND that huge display.
Also , "tiny bit thicker" ? You ever saw what iPods HDD look like compared to flash ? Its alot bigger than "tiny bit".