At this year's event, Munster is expecting Apple to refresh its iPod family through a number of "pricing and capacity changes." Specifically, he's looking for capacity increases to iPod shuffles and iPod nanos, but no price reductions on those models. Conversely, the iPod touch is likely to see a redesign "and a new $199 price point, in line with the iPhone."
The shuffle is likely to be unchanged this September. Sure 4GB would be doable at the same price-point as the 2GB holds right now, but why? Unless the shuffle is re-designed to have a small screen, there is not much point in having so much space for music that you can't browse. Or is Apple going to begin pushing a lossless format instead of 256 Kbps AAC?
Increased capacity on the Nano makes sense, but I can't shake the feeling that the Nano will be replaced with a touch screen Nano. Perhaps that will wait for another year. I've just been feeling that the click-wheel has had it's day -- It's simply too imprecise (at least on the Nano). EDIT: can this be a "'product transition' that cuts back on its profit margins?" Apple does sell a lot of Nanos -- if they went for touch-interface Nanos at the same prices, this would certainly lower margins and would "shut out rivals."
iPod Touch at $199? I doubt that very much. It might feasibly come down to $249, but I think it's far more likely to have larger capacity at the same price. The Touch and the iPhone are simply not competitors. Until Apple can find a way to incorporate an on-going usage charge into the Touch, it will be infeasible to charge so little up-front for the device. Remember that AT&T is subsidising the iPhone somewhere between $300 and $400, and they're happy to do it because people are signing up for data plans on top of their voice plans. Munster is way off on this one.
*The 3G shuffle gets capacity bumps to 2GB and 4GB at current prices, but also gains a tiny display. It may be slightly larger.
*The nano is killed off, replaced by the new shuffle.
*The iPod touch drops in price, and essentially replaces the nano, pushing everyone towards unified games and software in the App Store. An updated design may include playback controls on the body, and an internal speaker.
8GB - $199
16GB- $299
32GB - $399
Something like that is likely. I'm not so sure about the tiny screen though. What would be the point? The Shuffle sells well without it.
Although they use the same basic design, the cases are different. The Macbook Pro is larger than the Powerbook, with a 15.4" display vs 15.2", thinner than the Powerbook, and has the obvious addition of an iSight and IR sensor.
And of course the internal layout is completely different.
The size is a tiny bit larger, but the design is the same.
If the designs we've been seeing on the net are correct, this will be a much bigger change.
Since there seems to be a debate over the internal optical drive, why not just make it removable and let users put whatever they want inside: optical drive, second battery, or second hard drive.
Same reason iPhones and iPods don't use removable batteries: makes the overall product more bulky. Simply dropping the internal disc drive to save space and slim down the Air while providing an optional SuperDrive for those that actually want or need one makes more sense both in terms of technology and costs.
*The 3G shuffle gets capacity bumps to 2GB and 4GB at current prices, but also gains a tiny display. It may be slightly larger.
*The nano is killed off, replaced by the new shuffle.
*The iPod touch drops in price, and essentially replaces the nano, pushing everyone towards unified games and software in the App Store. An updated design may include playback controls on the body, and an internal speaker.
8GB - $199
16GB- $299
32GB - $399
Are people who bought the current Nano going to be happy with the Touch, which is larger in every possible metric? If I wanted a Touch, I would have bought one. I prefer the current Nano at $199 to even a free Touch because the size is my majority concern. I am not the only one. I'm not certain that a shuffle with a small screen would be adequate to replace the current Nano either.
What is particularly compelling about the current Nano is that it rides the features line so well. It's not as good as the Touch on video, but it's still adequate in a pinch. It can't browse the internet, but that's not important for this segment of the market. It has low capacity, but large enough to contain all of the music and playlists that one actually listens to on any regular basis. And on top of that, it's small enough to exercise with. If you are only going to have one iPod, the Nano is the one -- you won't go jogging with a Touch and you can't watch video with a shuffle. I don't think that Apple can replace the Nano with anything other than another Nano without losing a lot of customers to other players.
IMO, the MacBook's and the MacBook Pro's design is near perfect. Sleek, no unnecessary fuss, quality materials, clever details. What do you think could be optimized?
I'm still very happy with my G4. I've maxed out the ram, added a bigger hard drive and if I need Microsoft Windows it has VirtualPC for the Mac w/XP Pro. The only thing I could think of if I want to whine is it will soon need a new battery. Right now I'm getting about 1 1/2 to 2 hours of charge time.
I'm still very happy with my G4. I've maxed out the ram, added a bigger hard drive and if I need Microsoft Windows it has VirtualPC for the Mac w/XP Pro. The only thing I could think of if I want to whine is it will need soon is a new battery. Right now I'm getting about 1 1/2 to 2 hours of charge time.
IMO, the MacBook's and the MacBook Pro's design is near perfect. Sleek, no unnecessary fuss, quality materials, clever details. What do you think could be optimized?
The Macbook is plastic for one. Refreshing the design excites buyers. There is no other reason required than that.
Since there seems to be a debate over the internal optical drive, why not just make it removable and let users put whatever they want inside: optical drive, second battery, or second hard drive.
Because if it was removable, it wouldn't be slot-loading, and Apple is in love with slot-loading disc drives.
I'm still very happy with my G4. I've maxed out the ram, added a bigger hard drive and if I need Microsoft Windows it has VirtualPC for the Mac w/XP Pro. The only thing I could think of if I want to whine is it will need soon is a new battery. Right now I'm getting about 1 1/2 to 2 hours of charge time.
Ive been waiting to buy a new machine for a while. I retired a few years ago, so I don't NEED a new machine...
I've decided to wait for the Nehalem. I'd like it to get here.
Comments
At this year's event, Munster is expecting Apple to refresh its iPod family through a number of "pricing and capacity changes." Specifically, he's looking for capacity increases to iPod shuffles and iPod nanos, but no price reductions on those models. Conversely, the iPod touch is likely to see a redesign "and a new $199 price point, in line with the iPhone."
The shuffle is likely to be unchanged this September. Sure 4GB would be doable at the same price-point as the 2GB holds right now, but why? Unless the shuffle is re-designed to have a small screen, there is not much point in having so much space for music that you can't browse. Or is Apple going to begin pushing a lossless format instead of 256 Kbps AAC?
Increased capacity on the Nano makes sense, but I can't shake the feeling that the Nano will be replaced with a touch screen Nano. Perhaps that will wait for another year. I've just been feeling that the click-wheel has had it's day -- It's simply too imprecise (at least on the Nano). EDIT: can this be a "'product transition' that cuts back on its profit margins?" Apple does sell a lot of Nanos -- if they went for touch-interface Nanos at the same prices, this would certainly lower margins and would "shut out rivals."
iPod Touch at $199? I doubt that very much. It might feasibly come down to $249, but I think it's far more likely to have larger capacity at the same price. The Touch and the iPhone are simply not competitors. Until Apple can find a way to incorporate an on-going usage charge into the Touch, it will be infeasible to charge so little up-front for the device. Remember that AT&T is subsidising the iPhone somewhere between $300 and $400, and they're happy to do it because people are signing up for data plans on top of their voice plans. Munster is way off on this one.
My predictions:
*The 3G shuffle gets capacity bumps to 2GB and 4GB at current prices, but also gains a tiny display. It may be slightly larger.
*The nano is killed off, replaced by the new shuffle.
*The iPod touch drops in price, and essentially replaces the nano, pushing everyone towards unified games and software in the App Store. An updated design may include playback controls on the body, and an internal speaker.
8GB - $199
16GB- $299
32GB - $399
Something like that is likely. I'm not so sure about the tiny screen though. What would be the point? The Shuffle sells well without it.
Although they use the same basic design, the cases are different. The Macbook Pro is larger than the Powerbook, with a 15.4" display vs 15.2", thinner than the Powerbook, and has the obvious addition of an iSight and IR sensor.
And of course the internal layout is completely different.
The size is a tiny bit larger, but the design is the same.
If the designs we've been seeing on the net are correct, this will be a much bigger change.
Where's my new Nehalem Mac Pro?
------------------
iPod Touch - internal changes, new features unknown
4GB - $149
8GB - $199
16GB - $299
32GB - $399
iPod nano - axed
iPod shuffle - 2 & 4GB
Alu MacBooks
13" & 15"
Alu MacBook Pro
15" & 17" - (13" MBP is kinda of overlap between MB and MBA - so not viable)
Sep 2nd OR Sep 9th Tuesday Apple event almost a month away toooo early to get excited
Again with the 'analysts' and their precious outlooks and predictions? Jeez...
Some say analyst others say ANALyst.
Since there seems to be a debate over the internal optical drive, why not just make it removable and let users put whatever they want inside: optical drive, second battery, or second hard drive.
Same reason iPhones and iPods don't use removable batteries: makes the overall product more bulky. Simply dropping the internal disc drive to save space and slim down the Air while providing an optional SuperDrive for those that actually want or need one makes more sense both in terms of technology and costs.
My predictions:
*The 3G shuffle gets capacity bumps to 2GB and 4GB at current prices, but also gains a tiny display. It may be slightly larger.
*The nano is killed off, replaced by the new shuffle.
*The iPod touch drops in price, and essentially replaces the nano, pushing everyone towards unified games and software in the App Store. An updated design may include playback controls on the body, and an internal speaker.
8GB - $199
16GB- $299
32GB - $399
Are people who bought the current Nano going to be happy with the Touch, which is larger in every possible metric? If I wanted a Touch, I would have bought one. I prefer the current Nano at $199 to even a free Touch because the size is my majority concern. I am not the only one. I'm not certain that a shuffle with a small screen would be adequate to replace the current Nano either.
What is particularly compelling about the current Nano is that it rides the features line so well. It's not as good as the Touch on video, but it's still adequate in a pinch. It can't browse the internet, but that's not important for this segment of the market. It has low capacity, but large enough to contain all of the music and playlists that one actually listens to on any regular basis. And on top of that, it's small enough to exercise with. If you are only going to have one iPod, the Nano is the one -- you won't go jogging with a Touch and you can't watch video with a shuffle. I don't think that Apple can replace the Nano with anything other than another Nano without losing a lot of customers to other players.
iPod nano - axed
As with Galley, I suspect you don't understand why people buy Nanos -- for many (majority?) it's not the price.
Uh, because the current MacBook Pro is has almost the same case design as the Aluminium G4s that were released in 2003 maybe?
Compare PowerBook G4 with MacBook Pro. Spot the differences
Thats definitely not a 2003 Powerbook G4. The original PowerBook G4's (titanium) had black keyboards, plus Garageband didn't exist in 2003.
At any rate, I understand that the color has always been the same, but everything else has changed. It has been redesigned many times.
Anyway, screw all this!
Where's my new Nehalem Mac Pro?
Why the rush? Just kidding!!
I'm still very happy with my G4. I've maxed out the ram, added a bigger hard drive and if I need Microsoft Windows it has VirtualPC for the Mac w/XP Pro. The only thing I could think of if I want to whine is it will soon need a new battery. Right now I'm getting about 1 1/2 to 2 hours of charge time.
Why the rush? Just kidding!!
I'm still very happy with my G4. I've maxed out the ram, added a bigger hard drive and if I need Microsoft Windows it has VirtualPC for the Mac w/XP Pro. The only thing I could think of if I want to whine is it will need soon is a new battery. Right now I'm getting about 1 1/2 to 2 hours of charge time.
It's been upgraded to Tiger and iLife 08.
IMO, the MacBook's and the MacBook Pro's design is near perfect. Sleek, no unnecessary fuss, quality materials, clever details. What do you think could be optimized?
The Macbook is plastic for one. Refreshing the design excites buyers. There is no other reason required than that.
Since there seems to be a debate over the internal optical drive, why not just make it removable and let users put whatever they want inside: optical drive, second battery, or second hard drive.
Because if it was removable, it wouldn't be slot-loading, and Apple is in love with slot-loading disc drives.
As with Galley, I suspect you don't understand why people buy Nanos -- for many (majority?) it's not the price.
They could make a smaller touch.
http://www.everymac.com/systems/appl...erbook-g4.html
The size is a tiny bit larger, but the design is the same.
If the designs we've been seeing on the net are correct, this will be a much bigger change.
Yep. It'll be a bigger, thicker Macbook Air.
Why the rush? Just kidding!!
I'm still very happy with my G4. I've maxed out the ram, added a bigger hard drive and if I need Microsoft Windows it has VirtualPC for the Mac w/XP Pro. The only thing I could think of if I want to whine is it will need soon is a new battery. Right now I'm getting about 1 1/2 to 2 hours of charge time.
Ive been waiting to buy a new machine for a while. I retired a few years ago, so I don't NEED a new machine...
I've decided to wait for the Nehalem. I'd like it to get here.