It's going to be real interesting what they decide to do, if you Price a ipod touch at $199 it's going to kill the entire ipod Nano line and the classic as well, it will also kill the zune and almost every player price around that range
It's going to be real interesting what they decide to do, if you Price a ipod touch at $199 it's going to kill the entire ipod Nano line and the classic as well, it will also kill the zune and almost every player price around that range
not if they drop the 4GB nano to 99, 8GB nano to 149 and the 2GB shuffle is 49 and the 4GB is 79 :-D
But yeah, I think the idea is to kill the Classic altogether.
Why does Apple wait so late into the back-to-school buying season to update their lines? Most kids are back at college by Labor Day and have bought everything they need. They should get these updates out in early August.
Apple does it because they are smart. First, you get the kids back at college with everything they NEED. Then you create lust for the upcoming holiday season for them and everyone else by coming out with something they WANT.
Apple wants to give all iPods access "anywhere, anytime" to the iTunes App Store, video store and music store. This can be the only logical conclusion to their 'taking a hit' in the next quarter. With this in play, Apple will be able to avoid the normal seasonal ups and downs (with something akin to a subscription model, a lesson learned from the cell phone business and music sales) and build on their already solid revenue stream from digital downloads.
I hope they keep the current nano form factor and ramp up the storage to 32GB (I'll accept 16 grudgingly). A lot of us don't want or need to carry around video or surf the net, we just want lots of tunes (lossless tunes) in a small package.
I think 32GB is a bit much to expect when there isn't a 16GB model. I don't think Apple does any better than double the capacity any given year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazzy
I hope they increase the Classic from 160GB to 240 or more? There are many who want to have all of their music in studios, offices, second homes and so on. Got 36,000 song loaded on and hardly any room left.
I think there's potential, but that is a lot of songs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert
Why does Apple wait so late into the back-to-school buying season to update their lines? Most kids are back at college by Labor Day and have bought everything they need. They should get these updates out in early August.
iPods generally aren't used for education in itself, it's the computers they're trying to push but they give you a good deal for a computer and an iPod. Apple sells a heck of a lot more iPods from Oct-Dec than they do Jul-Sept.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Apple wants to give all iPods access "anywhere, anytime" to the iTunes App Store, video store and music store. This can be the only logical conclusion to their 'taking a hit' in the next quarter.
I don't think that's the *only* logical conclusion, there are other things that could happen too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galley
The classic is dead. Streaming your library over Wi-Fi, or even over the Internet is the future.
It's best not to pronounce something as dead until there's actually adequate replacement already in place. There's still a gap in time between the dead classic and the future of streaming everything. Internet services available to most people can't upload faster than 500kbps. Even assuming that, video streaming from a home computer isn't going to happen on 3G unless it's really cut down in data rate or you want to let it buffer. Using the radio that heavily consumes more power than just reading solid state memory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000
Have you ever done a placebo test? I.E. Encode in 256 AAC vs Lossless and see if you can hear the difference without knowing which one you are listening to?
I ask because I've done it with a number of people and not a single person could hear a single thing when listening to the music at a normal level. (I suppose if you blasted it as loud as possible you might hear the nuances but most people don't listen to music that loud)
On what equipment?
I don't think it's supposed to be about loudness. Some frequencies are changed, merged and shifted to cut down on the data and still sound close to the same as it did before. For people with better ears and better equipment, I imagine there can be a difference.
My prediction: if the Touch enters the $200 price slot it will be a Touch Nano that will replace the current Nano altogether.
I think the current Nano has its place. I like to be able to change tracks and skim podcasts without looking at the iPod while driving. Still, you may be right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denton
How is it that Munster doesn't understand that the Touch is not a competitor of the iPhone and so doesn't need to compete with it on retail price? Does he think that people don't understand the concept of a contract and how much they end up paying over its lifetime? Does he really have that low an opinion of the average consumer?
I wish I could agree with you... part of me really wants to . I continually overestimate what consumers understand... but I'm getting closer to an accurate estimate. You, me, and half the people on this board understand that a contract COSTS money. But so many people think the iPhone is $299 and you happen to be locked into AT&T (rather than the iPhone is $699 and AT&T subsidises that with their plans.)
I expect we may see both of these rumoured possibilities:
1. Cheaper: smaller form factor as rumored for iPhone. Same resolution.
2. Same price or more: larger form factor (2.5 times larger) as rumoured every couple of months.
I'm hoping for a larger iPod Touch, with the same features as now but add BLUETOOTH so I can connect to the internet via my Nokia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000
Have you ever done a placebo test? I.E. Encode in 256 AAC vs Lossless and see if you can hear the difference without knowing which one you are listening to?
That's called a "blind" test. :-)
And a double blind test is where the person running the experiment doesn't know which one he's using, nor does the test-taker.
I hope they increase the Classic from 160GB to 240 or more? There are many who want to have all of their music in studios, offices, second homes and so on. Got 36,000 song loaded on and hardly any room left.
Wow, at $0.99 per song, (or $9.99 per CD you've bought over the years), that is a huge investment in music... of course you would never consider securing a copy of music for yourself without compensating the artist in some way... would you?
The classic is dead. Streaming your library over Wi-Fi, or even over the Internet is the future.
Great! And that works on every single train, plane and subway? You know, places where I like to listen to music.
Streaming is limited to places with good reception. In the middle of no where or in places where 3G (or even EDGE) doesn't work - it is useless.
You know how many times I'm annoyed because I can't check a web page or even just my email due to poor reception? If that would suddenly also apply to all my music I'd be upset.
No, it's not the future - certainly not the near future.
Reason? At the price point it is a killer piece of kit and a best seller.
Keep the classic (in a similar form) and ramp up the storage I say!
Why? Because at last count I personally have 49702 tracks in my library and am looking for a bigger iPod. That may sound excessive but it certainly is not uncommon. Many of my friends have very large music libraries and they ain't gonna reduce them anytime soon.
"Streaming your library over Wi-Fi, or even over the Internet is the future". That may be the 'future' but at the 'present' that kind of access to a remote library over internet is mega expensive and not that practical. Forget about Wi-fi while traveling around with your iPod. Too flaky.
I bought my girlfriend an 8gb Nano recently and, while not a massive fan of music in general, she complains that there is not enough space for all the tracks she wants! Similarly some of her work colleagues also have 8gb Nanos and they concur. More space for tracks! The ipod touch is too expensive and includes features that they do not want or need. An iPod that does music and does it well, that's what they want. No bells and whistles thank you very much!
And a double blind test is where the person running the experiment doesn't know which one he's using, nor does the test-taker.
The timing of this is funny. Today, I had a long discussion with a fellow audiophile about blind and double blind testing. Like most audiophiles, he didn't understand it. Unlike most audiophiles, he was willing to agree that the results would mean something.
Wow, at $0.99 per song, (or $9.99 per CD you've bought over the years), that is a huge investment in music... of course you would never consider securing a copy of music for yourself without compensating the artist in some way... would you?
Many of us have hundreds or thousands of LP's and CD's.
I have over 1,800 LPs which I've been slowly digitizing. I have a couple of hundred reel to reel tapes, most of which have been digitized. I also have about a thousand CDs, many of which are on my computer now.
I believe that the Classic will stay on the market because it is the only one with the drive space that it provides.
I'm one that used the HD feature to use the largest part of my Classic for data backup when traveling on business. Longest flights were in the 14 - 15 hour range and the Classic was perfect - both a backup and an iPod.
For others it's carrying around their full CD collection (as well as their friends) and for others it can be a backup for their pic collection, etc.
If it sells at a profit then keep it, or put the HD in a touch to replace it. Capacity has its place in the mobile market.
Many of us have hundreds or thousands of LP's and CD's.
I have over 1,800 LPs which I've been slowly digitizing. I have a couple of hundred reel to reel tapes, most of which have been digitized. I also have about a thousand CDs, many of which are on my computer now.
I know many people with far more.
How about you?
In that case I'd say the OP's point stands... That's a HUGE investment in music!
1800 albums, I have no idea how much things like that cost, not to mention inflation adjusted, but I have to imagine that amount of music could have bought you a mid-range car, or a couple hundred shares of Microsoft in the 70s
I believe that the Classic will stay on the market because it is the only one with the drive space that it provide.
I'm actually surprised that it's not marketed as the perfect companion for a MacBook Air.
Better yet - currently with iTunes we have our whole library on the computer (say 40GB for example) and sync a smaller amount to our iPod Nano (say 7GB). It's a pity that we can't have our whole library on our iPod Classic (say 40GB) and sync a smaller amount to our MacBook (7GB).
Turn the model on its head. Make the classic the device where all our media is stored and free up space on the computer.
(ps. Same could work for the 160GB AppleTV. Use that as the media repository, sync a subset to your laptop).
Great! And that works on every single train, plane and subway? You know, places where I like to listen to music.
Streaming is limited to places with good reception. In the middle of no where or in places where 3G (or even EDGE) doesn't work - it is useless.
You know how many times I'm annoyed because I can't check a web page or even just my email due to poor reception? If that would suddenly also apply to all my music I'd be upset.
No, it's not the future - certainly not the near future.
That's why the iPod touch and iPhone have at least an 8GB "cache".
Comments
It's going to be real interesting what they decide to do, if you Price a ipod touch at $199 it's going to kill the entire ipod Nano line and the classic as well, it will also kill the zune and almost every player price around that range
not if they drop the 4GB nano to 99, 8GB nano to 149 and the 2GB shuffle is 49 and the 4GB is 79 :-D
But yeah, I think the idea is to kill the Classic altogether.
I did however see a silver classic on display today, for the first time, and I was very impressed with the design. Lovely wee piece of product design.
Why does Apple wait so late into the back-to-school buying season to update their lines? Most kids are back at college by Labor Day and have bought everything they need. They should get these updates out in early August.
Apple does it because they are smart. First, you get the kids back at college with everything they NEED. Then you create lust for the upcoming holiday season for them and everyone else by coming out with something they WANT.
That certainly has the potential to send iPod Classic and Nano use soaring again.
The classic is dead. Streaming your library over Wi-Fi, or even over the Internet is the future.
And just wait for your home iTunes library streamed to your iPhone... imagine the monthly bills then...
I hope they keep the current nano form factor and ramp up the storage to 32GB (I'll accept 16 grudgingly). A lot of us don't want or need to carry around video or surf the net, we just want lots of tunes (lossless tunes) in a small package.
I think 32GB is a bit much to expect when there isn't a 16GB model. I don't think Apple does any better than double the capacity any given year.
I hope they increase the Classic from 160GB to 240 or more? There are many who want to have all of their music in studios, offices, second homes and so on. Got 36,000 song loaded on and hardly any room left.
I think there's potential, but that is a lot of songs.
Why does Apple wait so late into the back-to-school buying season to update their lines? Most kids are back at college by Labor Day and have bought everything they need. They should get these updates out in early August.
iPods generally aren't used for education in itself, it's the computers they're trying to push but they give you a good deal for a computer and an iPod. Apple sells a heck of a lot more iPods from Oct-Dec than they do Jul-Sept.
Apple wants to give all iPods access "anywhere, anytime" to the iTunes App Store, video store and music store. This can be the only logical conclusion to their 'taking a hit' in the next quarter.
I don't think that's the *only* logical conclusion, there are other things that could happen too.
The classic is dead. Streaming your library over Wi-Fi, or even over the Internet is the future.
It's best not to pronounce something as dead until there's actually adequate replacement already in place. There's still a gap in time between the dead classic and the future of streaming everything. Internet services available to most people can't upload faster than 500kbps. Even assuming that, video streaming from a home computer isn't going to happen on 3G unless it's really cut down in data rate or you want to let it buffer. Using the radio that heavily consumes more power than just reading solid state memory.
Have you ever done a placebo test? I.E. Encode in 256 AAC vs Lossless and see if you can hear the difference without knowing which one you are listening to?
I ask because I've done it with a number of people and not a single person could hear a single thing when listening to the music at a normal level. (I suppose if you blasted it as loud as possible you might hear the nuances but most people don't listen to music that loud)
On what equipment?
I don't think it's supposed to be about loudness. Some frequencies are changed, merged and shifted to cut down on the data and still sound close to the same as it did before. For people with better ears and better equipment, I imagine there can be a difference.
My prediction: if the Touch enters the $200 price slot it will be a Touch Nano that will replace the current Nano altogether.
I think the current Nano has its place. I like to be able to change tracks and skim podcasts without looking at the iPod while driving. Still, you may be right.
How is it that Munster doesn't understand that the Touch is not a competitor of the iPhone and so doesn't need to compete with it on retail price? Does he think that people don't understand the concept of a contract and how much they end up paying over its lifetime? Does he really have that low an opinion of the average consumer?
I wish I could agree with you... part of me really wants to
I expect we may see both of these rumoured possibilities:
1. Cheaper: smaller form factor as rumored for iPhone. Same resolution.
2. Same price or more: larger form factor (2.5 times larger) as rumoured every couple of months.
I'm hoping for a larger iPod Touch, with the same features as now but add BLUETOOTH so I can connect to the internet via my Nokia.
Have you ever done a placebo test? I.E. Encode in 256 AAC vs Lossless and see if you can hear the difference without knowing which one you are listening to?
That's called a "blind" test. :-)
And a double blind test is where the person running the experiment doesn't know which one he's using, nor does the test-taker.
I hope they increase the Classic from 160GB to 240 or more? There are many who want to have all of their music in studios, offices, second homes and so on. Got 36,000 song loaded on and hardly any room left.
Wow, at $0.99 per song, (or $9.99 per CD you've bought over the years), that is a huge investment in music... of course you would never consider securing a copy of music for yourself without compensating the artist in some way... would you?
The classic is dead. Streaming your library over Wi-Fi, or even over the Internet is the future.
Great! And that works on every single train, plane and subway? You know, places where I like to listen to music.
Streaming is limited to places with good reception. In the middle of no where or in places where 3G (or even EDGE) doesn't work - it is useless.
You know how many times I'm annoyed because I can't check a web page or even just my email due to poor reception? If that would suddenly also apply to all my music I'd be upset.
No, it's not the future - certainly not the near future.
Apple kill the classic at their peril.
Reason? At the price point it is a killer piece of kit and a best seller.
Keep the classic (in a similar form) and ramp up the storage I say!
Why? Because at last count I personally have 49702 tracks in my library and am looking for a bigger iPod. That may sound excessive but it certainly is not uncommon. Many of my friends have very large music libraries and they ain't gonna reduce them anytime soon.
"Streaming your library over Wi-Fi, or even over the Internet is the future". That may be the 'future' but at the 'present' that kind of access to a remote library over internet is mega expensive and not that practical. Forget about Wi-fi while traveling around with your iPod. Too flaky.
I bought my girlfriend an 8gb Nano recently and, while not a massive fan of music in general, she complains that there is not enough space for all the tracks she wants! Similarly some of her work colleagues also have 8gb Nanos and they concur. More space for tracks! The ipod touch is too expensive and includes features that they do not want or need. An iPod that does music and does it well, that's what they want. No bells and whistles thank you very much!
That's called a "blind" test. :-)
And a double blind test is where the person running the experiment doesn't know which one he's using, nor does the test-taker.
The timing of this is funny. Today, I had a long discussion with a fellow audiophile about blind and double blind testing. Like most audiophiles, he didn't understand it. Unlike most audiophiles, he was willing to agree that the results would mean something.
Wow, at $0.99 per song, (or $9.99 per CD you've bought over the years), that is a huge investment in music... of course you would never consider securing a copy of music for yourself without compensating the artist in some way... would you?
Many of us have hundreds or thousands of LP's and CD's.
I have over 1,800 LPs which I've been slowly digitizing. I have a couple of hundred reel to reel tapes, most of which have been digitized. I also have about a thousand CDs, many of which are on my computer now.
I know many people with far more.
How about you?
I'm one that used the HD feature to use the largest part of my Classic for data backup when traveling on business. Longest flights were in the 14 - 15 hour range and the Classic was perfect - both a backup and an iPod.
For others it's carrying around their full CD collection (as well as their friends) and for others it can be a backup for their pic collection, etc.
If it sells at a profit then keep it, or put the HD in a touch to replace it. Capacity has its place in the mobile market.
Many of us have hundreds or thousands of LP's and CD's.
I have over 1,800 LPs which I've been slowly digitizing. I have a couple of hundred reel to reel tapes, most of which have been digitized. I also have about a thousand CDs, many of which are on my computer now.
I know many people with far more.
How about you?
In that case I'd say the OP's point stands... That's a HUGE investment in music!
1800 albums, I have no idea how much things like that cost, not to mention inflation adjusted, but I have to imagine that amount of music could have bought you a mid-range car, or a couple hundred shares of Microsoft in the 70s
I believe that the Classic will stay on the market because it is the only one with the drive space that it provide.
I'm actually surprised that it's not marketed as the perfect companion for a MacBook Air.
Better yet - currently with iTunes we have our whole library on the computer (say 40GB for example) and sync a smaller amount to our iPod Nano (say 7GB). It's a pity that we can't have our whole library on our iPod Classic (say 40GB) and sync a smaller amount to our MacBook (7GB).
Turn the model on its head. Make the classic the device where all our media is stored and free up space on the computer.
(ps. Same could work for the 160GB AppleTV. Use that as the media repository, sync a subset to your laptop).
Great! And that works on every single train, plane and subway? You know, places where I like to listen to music.
Streaming is limited to places with good reception. In the middle of no where or in places where 3G (or even EDGE) doesn't work - it is useless.
You know how many times I'm annoyed because I can't check a web page or even just my email due to poor reception? If that would suddenly also apply to all my music I'd be upset.
No, it's not the future - certainly not the near future.
That's why the iPod touch and iPhone have at least an 8GB "cache".