Whatever the design maybe I hope Apple will use a material or finish that doesn?t scratch when you burp or speak in the devices general direction. My iPod after a week looked like it was playing with my dog in a sand pit. This scratch magnet, Acrylic crap Apple is using for its consumer products has got to go.
As the Apple Turns weighs in [link current for 12/14/2004]:
Quote:
But if we had doubts before, we have to admit that they're all melting away; between analyst sources leaking the deal with SigmaTel, plenty of chunks of believable "evidence" floating around in the rumor soup, and fevered whisperings from hypothetical individuals who should know better than to be hypothetically blabbing about stuff under hypothetically ironclad NDA, we're pretty darn sure that there is a flash-based iPod and it does lack a screen, though we've heard that the mockup posted by The MacMind last week doesn't look anything like it. (Then again, that was clearly labeled as an artist's conception, so no one ever actually claimed it did.)
Apparent due date: MWSF.
AtAT has a pretty good track record as far as little birds, Alpha-Bits and various other supernatural happenings go.
OK there should be an iPod flash... But what if this thing is more than what we expect - a new tilt on the digital hub???
What if apple have converged the ipod (flash version) and iSight into a sleek mini cam - memo - storage device..?
Well maybe???
R
I hate that kind of idea. If I want a camera, I'll buy a 3 megapixel or above camera with a zoom lens. If I want to listen to music I'll buy an MP3 player. I only have a camera phone because it is virtually impossible to get a phone that isn't a camera phone, and so I never use my camera. Just gimme a damn iPod micro now!
Sorta, a bit, sometimes I think. IIRC, Firwire lets you upload and download at the same at full speed independently (I think this is called assymetric?), while USB 2's upload/download scheme means they both share a pipe. Something like that. Doesn't always matter for people. Still USB 2 is something like 480 Mbs versus Firewire's 400 Mbps (or 800 in the case of Firewire 2, whose weakenss is that it requires a different jack than FW 1).
I hate that kind of idea. If I want a camera, I'll buy a 3 megapixel or above camera with a zoom lens. If I want to listen to music I'll buy an MP3 player. I only have a camera phone because it is virtually impossible to get a phone that isn't a camera phone, and so I never use my camera. Just gimme a damn iPod micro now!
consumers like all-in-one devices like phones with cameras and PDAs and MP3 players, and video players - sony ericsson P900 for example. While i agree with you, lots of people like one device in their pocket.
well, before mine broke, the screen was getting pretty white from just sliding it in and out of the case. so, i figure, if i rubbed my thumb on it a lot, it would get even more scratched.
iPod mini is good for avoiding scratches - apart from the screen
Only under ideal conditions. USB performance is still tied into the cpu. Firewire is completely independent. So if you want to keep working while transferring, firewire will be faster. As a matter of fact, in the real world it is almost always faster.
does this news story confirm the existence of a screen-less iPod flash? I didn't believe that Apple would release a high-capacity device with no screen, but if they do, it'll be interesting to see how they've implemented the user interface.
O.T.:
Quote:
Originally posted by MacCrazy
USB 2 is faster than firewire
No, it isn't. The problem here is a bit like the megahertz myth. The numbers quoted for USB 2 and Firewire (480 Mbps and 400 Mbps) are the physical layer data rates, but these do not give an accurate indication of the achievable data rate available to higher layers in the protocol stack.
Taking an extreme example, have you ever compared file transfer speed between 802.11b (a.k.a. original Airport, supposedly 11 Mbps) against 10 Mbps Ethernet? With ethernet, you'll get transfers of around 8 Mbps. With 802.11b you'll be lucky to get 2 Mbps.
The situation with USB 2 and Firewire is less extreme, in most cases if you are talking about using them with a hard drive, you'll probably get equal performance from both. Firewire is a superior protocol because it includes QOS (quality of service), bandwidth is not shared between multiple devices connected in a chain, and (I believe) it has lower latency than USB.
consumers like all-in-one devices like phones with cameras and PDAs and MP3 players, and video players - sony ericsson P900 for example. While i agree with you, lots of people like one device in their pocket.
Lots of people like the idea of one item in their pocket, preferably the size of a credit card and either in their wallet or on their keychain. They're apparently only willing to pay so much for something like that though, for starters. I mean, a digital swiss army knife sounds perfect, but a few attempts are out there and not exactly setting the world on fire. Plus the iPod breaking open the Mp3 player market begs the question of whether people are more willing to go for design prowess (good interface, hardware and software) over something that is a jack of all trades but master of none. In other words, is any such über-device condemned to mediocrity and would it find itself in the bottom drawer next to that Rio 500 and 128 MB USB jump drive you got as a stocking stuffer last year?
Lots of people like the idea of one item in their pocket, preferably the size of a credit card and either in their wallet or on their keychain. They're apparently only willing to pay so much for something like that though, for starters. I mean, a digital swiss army knife sounds perfect, but a few attempts are out there and not exactly setting the world on fire. Plus the iPod breaking open the Mp3 player market begs the question of whether people are more willing to go for design prowess (good interface, hardware and software) over something that is a jack of all trades but master of none. In other words, is any such über-device condemned to mediocrity and would it find itself in the bottom drawer next to that Rio 500 and 128 MB USB jump drive you got as a stocking stuffer last year?
And you didn't even mention the terrible usability issues associated with such devices.
As with most things...it's about balance. Certainly some devices can be combined with great success. Others, not so much. Mobile phone with address book and calendar and todo reminders makes sense.
Of course I never thought the camera phone thing would be a hit...I was wrong.
Comments
But if we had doubts before, we have to admit that they're all melting away; between analyst sources leaking the deal with SigmaTel, plenty of chunks of believable "evidence" floating around in the rumor soup, and fevered whisperings from hypothetical individuals who should know better than to be hypothetically blabbing about stuff under hypothetically ironclad NDA, we're pretty darn sure that there is a flash-based iPod and it does lack a screen, though we've heard that the mockup posted by The MacMind last week doesn't look anything like it. (Then again, that was clearly labeled as an artist's conception, so no one ever actually claimed it did.)
Apparent due date: MWSF.
AtAT has a pretty good track record as far as little birds, Alpha-Bits and various other supernatural happenings go.
What if apple have converged the ipod (flash version) and iSight into a sleek mini cam - memo - storage device..?
Well maybe???
R
Originally posted by Rendezvous
OK there should be an iPod flash... But what if this thing is more than what we expect - a new tilt on the digital hub???
What if apple have converged the ipod (flash version) and iSight into a sleek mini cam - memo - storage device..?
Well maybe???
R
I hate that kind of idea. If I want a camera, I'll buy a 3 megapixel or above camera with a zoom lens. If I want to listen to music I'll buy an MP3 player. I only have a camera phone because it is virtually impossible to get a phone that isn't a camera phone, and so I never use my camera. Just gimme a damn iPod micro now!
Originally posted by Rendezvous
USB 2 (note: firewire not required as data transfer is low)
R
USB 2 is faster than firewire
Anyhoo, back to the topic...
Originally posted by G_Warren
I hate that kind of idea. If I want a camera, I'll buy a 3 megapixel or above camera with a zoom lens. If I want to listen to music I'll buy an MP3 player. I only have a camera phone because it is virtually impossible to get a phone that isn't a camera phone, and so I never use my camera. Just gimme a damn iPod micro now!
consumers like all-in-one devices like phones with cameras and PDAs and MP3 players, and video players - sony ericsson P900 for example. While i agree with you, lots of people like one device in their pocket.
Originally posted by mattjohndrow
well, before mine broke, the screen was getting pretty white from just sliding it in and out of the case. so, i figure, if i rubbed my thumb on it a lot, it would get even more scratched.
iPod mini is good for avoiding scratches - apart from the screen
Originally posted by MacCrazy
USB 2 is faster than firewire
Only under ideal conditions. USB performance is still tied into the cpu. Firewire is completely independent. So if you want to keep working while transferring, firewire will be faster. As a matter of fact, in the real world it is almost always faster.
Originally posted by MacCrazy
iPod mini is good for avoiding scratches - apart from the screen
that's what i'm saying, if the wheel is under the screen, then it'll scratch it
O.T.:
Originally posted by MacCrazy
USB 2 is faster than firewire
No, it isn't. The problem here is a bit like the megahertz myth. The numbers quoted for USB 2 and Firewire (480 Mbps and 400 Mbps) are the physical layer data rates, but these do not give an accurate indication of the achievable data rate available to higher layers in the protocol stack.
Taking an extreme example, have you ever compared file transfer speed between 802.11b (a.k.a. original Airport, supposedly 11 Mbps) against 10 Mbps Ethernet? With ethernet, you'll get transfers of around 8 Mbps. With 802.11b you'll be lucky to get 2 Mbps.
The situation with USB 2 and Firewire is less extreme, in most cases if you are talking about using them with a hard drive, you'll probably get equal performance from both. Firewire is a superior protocol because it includes QOS (quality of service), bandwidth is not shared between multiple devices connected in a chain, and (I believe) it has lower latency than USB.
Originally posted by MacCrazy
consumers like all-in-one devices like phones with cameras and PDAs and MP3 players, and video players - sony ericsson P900 for example. While i agree with you, lots of people like one device in their pocket.
Lots of people like the idea of one item in their pocket, preferably the size of a credit card and either in their wallet or on their keychain. They're apparently only willing to pay so much for something like that though, for starters. I mean, a digital swiss army knife sounds perfect, but a few attempts are out there and not exactly setting the world on fire. Plus the iPod breaking open the Mp3 player market begs the question of whether people are more willing to go for design prowess (good interface, hardware and software) over something that is a jack of all trades but master of none. In other words, is any such über-device condemned to mediocrity and would it find itself in the bottom drawer next to that Rio 500 and 128 MB USB jump drive you got as a stocking stuffer last year?
Originally posted by BuonRotto
Lots of people like the idea of one item in their pocket, preferably the size of a credit card and either in their wallet or on their keychain. They're apparently only willing to pay so much for something like that though, for starters. I mean, a digital swiss army knife sounds perfect, but a few attempts are out there and not exactly setting the world on fire. Plus the iPod breaking open the Mp3 player market begs the question of whether people are more willing to go for design prowess (good interface, hardware and software) over something that is a jack of all trades but master of none. In other words, is any such über-device condemned to mediocrity and would it find itself in the bottom drawer next to that Rio 500 and 128 MB USB jump drive you got as a stocking stuffer last year?
And you didn't even mention the terrible usability issues associated with such devices.
As with most things...it's about balance. Certainly some devices can be combined with great success. Others, not so much. Mobile phone with address book and calendar and todo reminders makes sense.
Of course I never thought the camera phone thing would be a hit...I was wrong.
Originally posted by Aquatic
yo rolo that shit is HOT.
Thanks, Aquatic. There's word that ASUSTeK Computer Inc. may be making the flash iPod for Apple. Meanwhile, check out these photo comparisons:
The iRiver reminds me of:
Originally posted by Rolo
Thanks, Aquatic. There's word that ASUSTeK Computer Inc. may be making the flash iPod for Apple. Meanwhile, check out these photo comparisons:
cooooool