×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple May Introduce New iPod on Wednesday

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the tiny-christmas dept.

190

UnHolier than ever writes "Apple may be planning to announce a 'revamp' of the iPod on Wednesday. Reporters from across Europe have been asked to view a broadcast presentation by Steve Jobs at the BBC headquarters. Theorized features for this new iPod include a full or wide-screen with touch controls, ala the ever-popular iPhone. '[An analyst with Goldman Sachs] believes that a new line of iPods will boost demand for the gadget from Goldman's present forecast of about 19.8 million units for Apple's key first quarter - the reporting period that covers Christmas. However, that still suggests that demand for iPods will be flat, at best, compared with the same period last year, when Apple sold about 21 million devices.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

190 comments

oh my (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20451997)

I'm about to cream my pants.

Re:oh my (0, Offtopic)

Goffee71 (628501) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452071)

If you'd bought a Sony PSP you'd have had well-creamed pants years ago!

Re:oh my (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452249)

Is there something wrong with wanting more than one pair of creamed pants?

Still lame (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452865)

Wireless. More space than a Nomad. Still lame.

Based on iPhone? (0)

nano2nd (205661) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452023)

If there really is a wi-fi-touch-screen-OSX based iPod coming out that may or may not be based on the iPhone, they better make sure there is no mic. This could make a fantastic Skype handset. And damage the iPhone business model. Not that unlocking hasn't done that already though...

Buy a Mac or Build Your Own Mac [googlepages.com] ?

Re:Based on iPhone? (5, Insightful)

phoenixwade (997892) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452131)

Not that unlocking hasn't done that already though...
Do you really think that unlocking the iPhone has caused damage to the business model? An unlocking hack made the iPhone available to consumers who didn't want to be locked into AT&T, and Apple still gets whatever the benefits of contract exclusivity provided them.

Sounds to me like everyones business model except AT&T's wins here. I can live with that....

look at the contracts... (4, Interesting)

YesIAmAScript (886271) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452699)

The contracts Apple signed in Europe give Apple 10% of the revenue the wireless provider gets from activating the phone.

If you unlock your iPhone and don't use it on the contracted provider, then Apple loses that money.

So yeah, the unlocking has likely hurt Apple's business model.

Re:look at the contracts... (0)

Dan Ost (415913) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452993)

As long as Apple makes money on the phone (which seems likely), they come out ahead. People who don't want AT&T can now buy the phone. This is a big deal in Europe where AT&T has almost no market.

Re:look at the contracts... (2, Insightful)

Dogtanian (588974) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453885)

As long as Apple makes money on the phone (which seems likely), they come out ahead. People who don't want AT&T can now buy the phone. This is a big deal in Europe where AT&T has almost no market.
You're assuming that the AT&T deal is worldwide, which isn't the case as far as I know. Last I heard, Apple were in negotiations with the major Euro telcos (Orange, T Mobile, etc).

That having been said, Apple would be better going with the proposed 3G version of the iPhone in Europe for reasons I cover in this comment [slashdot.org] . (Note that this was written before I was aware that Apple *did* intend launching a 3G version of the iPhone).

Re:look at the contracts... (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453429)

And how will you get that iPhone to begin with?

An analysis of the parts/suppliers suggested that they have a pretty decent profit margin on the iPhone even if it's never activated. The monthly revenue (they have a similar deal with AT&T) is a nice bonus but doesn't keep them from bleeding red ink.

Re:look at the contracts... (2, Interesting)

phoenixwade (997892) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453563)

The contracts Apple signed in Europe give Apple 10% of the revenue the wireless provider gets from activating the phone.

If you unlock your iPhone and don't use it on the contracted provider, then Apple loses that money.

So yeah, the unlocking has likely hurt Apple's business model.
That presumes that there is a significant percentage of people willing to go with the provider that Apple partnered with, that is, willing enough to put up with that provider to own the iPhone. It's all pure speculation, but it seems like apple will make more on the phone than they would have otherwise with sales lost because of the provider in the partnership.

Re:Based on iPhone? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452209)

Buy a Mac or Build Your Own [PC in an old ] Mac [chassis]?
Buy a Mac, dude. $499 at Fry's.

Just add a PC keyboard+Mouse and throw it behind your HDTV or flat-panel and you're golden, complete with $200 worth of software (Tiger, GarageBand, iPhoto3, iMovieHD3, iWeb, etc..). Also, spring for the extra $60 to get a .Mac account ($99 if you don't take it at the time of purchase), but blow-off AppleCare for the low-end model.

Yeah, Apple has models that go all the way to $2800 and they are worth every penny, but if you are just looking for an alternative to a PC-clone, grab the $499 model and begin getting things done with software written by people who would see their visual interface as a combination of art and a reflection on their intelligence. Do you think the slaves in Redmond have such feelings?

Re:Based on iPhone? (2)

nano2nd (205661) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452405)

Dude, I know - that was just an experiment. You know, for nerds.

I own two other real Macs already - G4 eMac and a Powermac G4 dual 1GHz with 23" Cinema display. I'm just in the process of working out which to retire/sell and what to replace with - once Leopard is out, that is.

Hackintosh is a cool experiment but the scene seems to consist of a handful of very talented hackers, some very shady types, and a lot of what we in the 80's would have called Lamers.

Whoah there, this is now both off-topic and flamebait. LOL.

Re:Based on iPhone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452315)

Buy a Mac or Build Your Own Mac?


Unfortunately, it seems Apple have closed the source (why was this not announced anywhere? their marketing material still touts an open source base, and it was one of the reasons I loved OS X), with the last Darwin source release corresponding to OS X release 10.4.9. This makes building a kernel that supports non-Apple hardware much harder.

Do you only hang out in places where there is wifi (1)

jaypaulw (889877) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452645)

I'll never understand the obsession with using a portable device as a VOIP phone. Don't you have enough regular minutes? Is it really worth the hassle of switching back and forth between the two services? Don't you just have a cell phone that works fine?

Re:Do you only hang out in places where there is w (1)

Oliver Wendell Jones (158103) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452703)

That's because nerds like to use technology just for the sake of technology - it doesn't matter if it makes your life easier or not, it's all about using it because "you can".

At a previous job, I was full time and was working with several contractors. I asked one of the contractors to e-mail me a document that I needed and he said "no, I'll setup an FTP server on my machine and you can login and download it" and he then spent the next two hours fiddle-farting around with trying to setup and run an FTP server on a secure corporate network on PCs on which you couldn't really install much as you weren't allowed Admin privileges. Did I mention that I sat less than 20 feet away from him?

After allowing him to waste two hours of time, I told him that in the future when someone asks you to do something, it doesn't matter if there is a "cooler" or "more nerdy" way of doing it, you do it in the fastest and most convenient way possible. Needless to say, when it came time to start cutting contractors loose, he was one of the first ones to go.

whoreabull corepirate nazis introducing new & (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452029)

unusual ways to create additional debt & disruption for most of US, while our fellow humans across the water continue to explode by yOUR hand.

infactdead corepirate nazis still WAY off track
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 01, @09:35AM (#20433195)
it's only a matter of time/space/circumstance.

previous post:
mynuts won 'off t(r)opic'???
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 30, @10:22AM (#20411119)
eye gas you could call this 'weather'?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8004881114 [google.com] [google.com] 646406827 [google.com]

be careful, the whack(off)job in the next compartment may be a high RANKing corepirate nazi official.

previous post:
whoreabull corepirate nazi felons planning trips
(Score: mynuts won, robbIE's 'secret' censorship score)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01, @12:13PM (#20072457)
in orbit perhaps? we wouldn't want to be within 500 miles of the naykid furor at this power point.

better days ahead?

as in payper liesense hypenosys stock markup FraUD felons are on their way out? what a revolutionary concept.

from previous post: many demand corepirate nazi execrable stop abusing US

we the peepoles?

how is it allowed? just like corn passing through a bird's butt eye gas.

all they (the nazi execrable) want is... everything. at what cost to US?

for many of US, the only way out is up.

don't forget, for each of the creators' innocents harmed (in any way) there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/US as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile will not be available after the big flash occurs.

'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious life0cidal glowbull warmongering execrable.

some of US should consider ourselves very fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate.

it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc....

as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis.

concern about the course of events that will occur should the life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order.

'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

Re:whoreabull corepirate nazis introducing new &am (3, Funny)

heinousjay (683506) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452045)

Reading your posts is practically orgasmic for me. So much work, so barely comprehensible, and really, your points would almost be reasonable if not for the veneer of insanity you seem to try so hard to add.

You, sir, rock.

Re:whoreabull corepirate nazis introducing new &am (1)

sgant (178166) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452279)

It's like it was written in English by some insane paranoid in some bare-lightbulb, single-room apartment....then translated into Chinese....then French....then back into English.

Re:whoreabull corepirate nazis introducing new &am (1)

ianare (1132971) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452303)

Could this post be related to this [arstechnica.com] ? The link to the bogus google video especially ...

Printer friendly link (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452033)

Link [timesonline.co.uk]

Reading this and the original article is like day and night.

Speculation isn't news. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452049)

Speculation for Nerds. News that may matter.

Re:Speculation isn't news. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452673)

That's all right, most of the people here don't seem intelligent enough to be nerds.

Sure it is (2, Funny)

catbutt (469582) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452739)

Assuming you think news should only be about provable facts....well, it is certainly a fact that some people think that Apple may introduce a new iPod on wednesday. Whether that is is important or not* is a matter of debate, but it is certainly a real fact, and therefore news.

*it does have very tangible effects, in the form of moving markets.

Re:Sure it is (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453487)

But it's not news that people are speculating about it, the date or the features, it has been speculated for weeks now ;)

Re:Speculation isn't news. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452911)

You mean... they might NOT introduce a new iPod?? Oh no's!!! Now I might never get the chance to see a new gadget I can't afford to buy. I'm forever doomed to carrying my desktop boom-box on my shoulder.

My suggestion: (1, Informative)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452061)

Let's wait wednesday and see if we have at least something to talk about, mmmkay?

Re:My suggestion: (4, Funny)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452691)

Is this some kind of Zen riddle? If no one reads the article, does it matter that the article has no substance?

Re:My suggestion: (4, Interesting)

DMoylan (65079) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452711)

perhaps.

what i do know is that 2 of our suppliers who normally don't sell apple stock were offering cheap ipods for the past 2-3 months here in ireland. they really seem to have been off loading ipod video and ipod nano stock. i also heard from friends who had companies they dealt with offering similar deals. now it might just be the lower end but it was still a significant departure for these companies to suddenly offer stock from a company they normally had no dealings with.

prices offered to us
* ipod nano 4gb 165
* ipod 30gb black 210

Re:My suggestion: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20453027)

They are trying to recoup any cost they can because they know that old apple stuff doesn't sell well once new stuff comes out.

Re:My suggestion: (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453869)

Sigh, if we did that then all the apple fanboys wouldn't tout the benefits of their i thingies twice.

Speculation is well and good in moderation for things that probably won't happen for years. But for crying out loud is it really necessary to hear about things just because Apple or Google might be doing them in the future?

I just wish /. could spend less time marketing Apple than Apple does.

You know (4, Insightful)

phoenixwade (997892) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452065)

With 6 billion or so people on the planet, sooner or later the market will reach saturation, and ipod sale are going to become flat. I'm not really sure why flattening of iPod sales is big news.

That said, I have a 3rd gen iPod, and it's getting close to the time to replace it, I have hopes for a widescreen color iPod in the 100 gb range, So if it's avaiable soon, I may very well bee the 19 million and first sale this year.

Re:You know (1)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452427)

That said, I have a 3rd gen iPod, and it's getting close to the time to replace it, I have hopes for a widescreen color iPod in the 100 gb range, So if it's avaiable soon, I may very well bee the 19 million and first sale this year.

You can reject the possibility of a full-screen iPod ("ala iPhone" as the summary says) right now: because well, it's expensive.

iPhone costs $600 with 2 year AT&T contract. A $600 iPod wouldn't sell well.

Speak for yourself (1)

blackchiney (556583) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452471)

My 2nd Gen 20GB iPod is still kicking around. And that sucker was expensive. 500 large in 2002. Fortunately I didn't buy it but it's proved its worth everytime.

Re:Speak for yourself (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452765)

So, you stole it?

Re:You know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452721)

Saturation? NEVER! What people who talk about market saturation for the iPod don't seem to understand is that there are thousands of kids turning into teenagers every friggin' day who are just now getting intrested in music and who now want an iPod -their first iPod. There's about a million and a half more examples...

Re:You know (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452751)

I, too, have a 3G iPod (20GB) in need of replacing. I would like to replace it with an iPod Nano with the same sort of storage capabilities. It has all of the features I need, but I'd like them in a smaller package with no moving parts. Considering how cheap 16GB USB flash drives are now, that should be feasible. It's been a really long time since the iPod lines were revamped, especially considering how much flash prices have been falling recently.

Re:You know (1)

LinuxIdiot (708662) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452855)

I have had a nano since they were released and I just came into a small chunk of change. If any of the speculations are true concerning the wifi or even touchscreen.

I will probably hold onto the cash and update my nano to something else. The only thing that would stop me is if it is hard-drive based. I love my lil flash-based ipod.

Re:You know (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453569)

I also have a 3G iPod. I replaced the battery a few months back, but it's otherwise been rock solid. I haven't considered buying another one. Until I took a close look at my fuck-buddy's video iPod. Thinner, full color screen, (I don't care so much about the new combined scrollwheel, though). I would impulse purchase an iPhone-ish iPod (depending on the features).

Re:You know (3, Insightful)

DurendalMac (736637) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453857)

What he doesn't take into account are people unloading their old iPods for a new one. I have an 80GB iPod Video right now, and I will put it up for sale the moment Apple announces a video iPod. If it has everything the iPhone does minus the phone, expect sales to go off the charts.

Awesome (3, Funny)

/ASCII (86998) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452081)

I just bought a 8 GB Nano today. And in less than a week, it's going to be vintage. Yes!

Re:Awesome (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452157)

I just bought a 8 GB Nano today. And in less than a week, it's going to be vintage. Yes!

Don't worry, Apple have ensured through scratchable screens, faulty earjacks and sealed in batteries that you're never too far from getting a new iPod. Built-in obsolescence is the new Apple model. Your only hope of escape is to stay away from iTMS DRM so your options are open when upgrade time rolls around again.

Re:Awesome (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452633)

Which is why iTunes rips to some proprietary format that only the iPod supports. (Apple Audio Codec or something like that.) Ripped your own music using iTunes? You can only play it in iTunes and on the iPod. You'll get to rerip everything if you want to use it on a new player.

Now I know that every time this is mentioned some Apple fanboy will pop up and say that AAC is open, but I've never found anything other than the iPod that can play it. So even if it is open, nothing uses it, making the point moot.

Re:Awesome (1)

the unbeliever (201915) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452659)

Can't believe I'm replying to an AC..

Itunes can rip to MP3 as well as AAC.

Re:Awesome (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452725)

Oh, big deal. The default is to rip to AAC. The average user isn't even going to be aware they need to change this, let alone figure out the steps to do it. Changing the encode options involves:

1. Knowing that you need to if you want to use the files outside of iTunes.
2. Finding the option - it's hidden under the "Advanced" tab inside the "Import" tab in the Preferences window. For Windows users, the Preferences are also hidden in the Edit menu - the Windows standard is "Tools/Options" and not "Edit/Preferences".
3. Knowing that "AAC Encoder" is the option to change.

And, even after all that, the iTunes MP3 encoder sucks ass. You're better off using CDex and LAME. Which, of course, involves knowing that.

There's no way an average user would know all that. Most users will wind up with a collection of AAC files that they can't use on anything but iTunes and iPod.

Re:Awesome (1)

lekikui (1000144) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453037)

Afraid that it rips to MP3 by default. Of course, I don't use it, but I happen to know that the Mac a friend of mine has rips MP3 files that I can play over here easily enough.

I can't even hear any quality difference.

So maybe it's time to stop spreading fud about things.

Re:Awesome (5, Informative)

Bemopolis (698691) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452773)

You made a good choice in posting as Anonymous Coward. Still, it's too bad for you that /. doesn't have the option of posting as Stupid Drooling Fucking Moron.

Once again, for the newbies:

- AAC (ADVANCED Audio Codec) has NOTHING to do with Apple, beyond being their compression scheme of choice. Posting the Wikipedia link would insult us both.
- The iTunes STORE sells tracks that only play on iPods; taking Steve Jobs at his word, this is only due to DRM required by the record companies.
- Most "mp3 players" will play AAC-encoded tracks. It's just a codec for mp4s, after all. If you really can't find one, go to your local community college and take a class on Google.
- If you're really that paranoid about AAC, set iTunes to encode in mp3 before your first rip. Then you will be able to survive in a world where only iPods can play tracks ripped in iTunes. Whatever world that is, because it ain't this one.

Now PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE shut the fuck up.

Re:Awesome (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452807)

Now I know that every time this is mentioned some Apple fanboy will pop up and say that AAC is open, but I've never found anything other than the iPod that can play it
Uh, what? I was ripping AACs with CDex and playing them in WinAMP before iTunes supported it. Philips were making AAC players before Apple, and all relatively recent Nokia devices support AAC. Pretty much any software player supports them, and most devices other than the Zune support it. The only thing less proprietary than AAC is Vorbis; even MP3 has stricter licensing requirements in order to support it.

Re:Awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452927)

Pretty much any software player supports them, and most devices other than the Zune support it.
Actually, the Zune *does* support it.

Otherwise you are correct, though. Basically every mobile phone (not only Nokia phones) that came out in the last years and sports music playing capabilties does not only support MP3, but also AAC.

Re:Awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20453065)

Now I know that every time this is mentioned some Apple fanboy will pop up and say that AAC is open, but I've never found anything other than the iPod that can play it. So even if it is open, nothing uses it, making the point moot.
You mean, you have never seen a Zune? Or basically any mobile phone with integrated music player released in recent years? You don't use Winamp, VLC, RealPlayer, amarok, MPlayer, ... Windows Media Player? Playstation 3? XBOX 360? Because all these devices support AAC. Of course not AAC with DRM from the iTunes store, but self-ripped AAC files don't have DRM. I'm personally using them happily on my Ubuntu PC with amarok.

Even Creative now supports AAC: http://creative.com/press/releases/welcome.asp?pid =12786 [creative.com]
Also some players from SanDisk.

Re:Awesome (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453409)

Unencrypted AAC isn't as ubiquitous as MP3 but a number of popular non-Apple devices can play unencrypted tracks. e.g. the Zune, PSP, Zen and more besides. AAC adoption also appears to be gaining traction, partly because music / video devices are converging so AAC support falls out of implementing MPEG-4 for video playback. So you can rip CDs from iTunes and they work on other devices. The problem is the iTunes Music Store. Tracks bought online are still AAC but the content is held in an encrypted container that renders them unreadable on other devices. So as long as you don't use iTMS you should be safe.

Re:Awesome (2, Interesting)

thedbp (443047) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453399)

Ugh. FUD.

Scratchable screens - Yes, because all cell phone manufacturers and manufactuerers of other DAPs use completely unscratchable screens. Dude, learn how to take care of your things. I have a 3rd gen iPod and the screen is gorgeous still because I value it, and make sure I take care of it. It ain't hard. Take personal responsibility.

Faulty earjacks - yes, the earphone jacks are built to have their solder joints break on purpose. I'm sure it has nothing to do with tons of pressure being applied to the jack by pushing down or pulling sideways on the headphone jack very hard. Nothing at all. Again - Dude, learn how to take care of your things.

Sealed in batteries - for which there is a very inexpensive battery replacement program, which, at $70 nets you an iPod with a new battery, new case, and new HD, with a 90 day warranty. How many AAA batteries would you have run through in the 300-400 charge cycles of the internal battery? 2 or 3 every 10 hours of playback? Do you have any idea how expensive disposable batteries are over time?

Your arguments are old, clichéd, and well-documented bullshit. Please stop trolling.

A revamped iPod (1)

iMac Were (911261) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452109)

Who gives a rat's ass about the technical details - I want to know what color it will be. I hope it's pink. I looooove pink. Or maybe it's patterned. Ooooh polka dots, I think polka dots are simply adorable! Get you later, sweeties. XXX

Rumor Roundup (3, Informative)

necro81 (917438) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452223)

Engadget has a helpful rumor roundup [engadget.com] - just to keep the /. discussion lively with speculation. Aside from the next-gen touchscreen iPod, there's the Beatles' catalogue on iTMS, direct-to-iPhone (iPod) music store downloads, and increased capacity in the Nano. "Analysis" (i.e., educated speculation and wishful thinking) available from CNet [com.com] , ArsTechnica [arstechnica.com] , and AppleInsider (1 [appleinsider.com] , 2 [appleinsider.com] , 3 [appleinsider.com] ).

May? (2, Interesting)

Thwomp (773873) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452235)

Ha! Lets not err on the side of caution here, I thought it was a dead cert. Especially since those new iPod photos appeared which Apple promptly issued a take-down for.

Re:May? (1)

Jeremy_Bee (1064620) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453589)

I think it's pretty much a certainty also for many different reasons. But to be accurate, there have actually been no iPod photos released.

The "photos" in question was a single snapshot of a computer screen that had a PhotoShop file displayed on it. The PhotoShop file was a crude mock up, of an advertisement for *one* of the rumoured new iPods. Apple asked for it to be taken down as it had *some* Apple IP in it. Best bet is still that it was 9to5mac.com (the site that posted the image), or their Chinese informant, that created this image.

Probably I am being picky, these could of course be direct mock-ups of the new iPods, but the facts are different from saying "(actual) iPod photos (have) appeared which Apple promptly issued a take-down for."

Re:May? (1)

Thwomp (773873) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453893)

No feel free to be picky. I only had blogs to go by and it seems like Chinese whispers (no pun intended) have played a part again.

I was under the impression that actual first-hand product shots had appeared. Thanks for clearing that up!

I have always wondered (2, Interesting)

tit0.c (245434) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452273)

Why hasnt apple put AM/FM/XM/whatever radio capabilities in the iPods.
I still listen to radio ocasionally when I want to listen to something different.

Re:I have always wondered (2, Insightful)

animaal (183055) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452337)

I can only assume it's because Apple would rather you pay them for music on iTunes than listen to the radio for free.

Shame really, radio hardware can be tony, and costs almost nothing.

Re:I have always wondered (1)

iainl (136759) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452387)

Because they'd rather charge you extra to have that as an option, still.

Re:I have always wondered (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452519)

If you're honestly surprised, I can tell you from my perspective, you're in the minority. Unless you're in a big city, there's nothing worth listening to on the radio in most of America. To top that, Apple is very conscious of keeping device size down, so adding features is only going to happen if its going to significantly drive sales. I think they made the right decision. You can get battery powered mini-radios for $10, it's not something I'm looking for out of an ipod.

Re:I have always wondered (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452857)

dumb. every mp3 player on the market has an FM tuner built in, and many are smaller than the ipods or nanos or shuffles.

and almost every major metro area has an NPR station, which to me is wildly more interesting than an endless loop of songs i've already heard before.

Re:I have always wondered (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452879)

Because if you're listening to the radio you're not buying from iTunes.

Although, now that you mention it, my walkman can tune into the radio, and Sony has a music store... Of course, tuning into the radio with it is a pain in the ass, as it slides down to like 85.0 everytime I switch from music to radio, and insists on stopping at every channel. (If you've got one, look up a sf.net project that allows you to unlock it if you've got one, otherwise it's a brick that can only be used with SonicStage.)

Re:I have always wondered (1)

Steve001 (955086) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453159)

I can't say on the subject of FM or XM, but one possible reason that an AM radio isn't included with the iPod could be that the device itself could intefere with good AM radio reception (since it never actually turns off). I've noticed that many digital audio players (DAP) that include an FM radio don't include the ability to receive AM, so it could be that the nature of a DAP makes it unsuitable for use as an AM radio, possibly because its relatively small size makes it difficult to isolate the AM circuitry.

It could also be that the size of the antenna needed for AM would require an increase in the size of the iPod. I have a small portable AM/Stereo FM radio and it is roughly the same size (it's a little shorter and a little thicker) as the current iPod Nano. It could be that the size of the AM antenna limited how small the device could be made.

Re:I have always wondered (1)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453419)

Because then you'd have a sat connected mobile computing device, which would (a) really piss off the cell vendors and (b) spoil Apple's chance to offer a satellite PDA/VOIP phone at a stratospheric price.

Re:I have always wondered (1)

old and new again (985238) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453447)

because radio is SO 1985 and jobs looks towards the future, not the past (and for what's playing on radio, it's not like it's a loss)

Re:I have always wondered (1)

Jeremy_Bee (1064620) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453703)

because radio is SO 1985 and jobs looks towards the future, not the past (and for what's playing on radio, it's not like it's a loss)
I think this is spot on.

iTunes is about music, and iPods are about quality.

Why would Apple put AM or FM radio on the thing? So you can catch up on the pig farmer reports? So you can "catch the game" or listen to those annoying morning DJ's? Howard Stern?

Wow, what a cool, trendy image *that* projects. :-)

Radio is junk, and it's what we now refer to as "ad-supported streaming media." Why would Apple go near that with a ten foot pole?

Re:I have always wondered (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20454011)

I'm sorry that FM radio in US sucks, but in some parts of Europe you can actually listen to excellent radio stations.

Adding a radio to an ipod chip costs next to nothing, but of course:

Apple-knows-whats-best-for-me.

I'm in store for a new iPod (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452281)

I'm in store for a new iPod, so I can't wait for the new release. Not because I can't wait for some panty-knot feature, but simply because if I can get a better product for the same price... well, go figure.

That said, at this point all I can hope is that the new product won't suck. As a lot of iPod users will likely agree, from the very beginning the iPod was a great product. All you wanted, and just a tad bit more. (No WiFi, less storage, lame... yada yada yada, sure...) With every new model, I sort of cringed, expecting to see a product with some stupid feature that would make the iPod less usable. Something that Sony might pull off. But that has never happened, and I'm hoping that it won't. With that in mind, I somehow find it hard to imagine an iPhone minus the phone. That would sort of be lame, and actually stop me from buying it.

But then again, I've been an on-and-off Mac user for over 20 years now. I probably have followed the Apple product life cycle to a certain extent in the past. ;-)

http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/ [misterbg.org]

Sounds like the European iPhone launch to me (2, Insightful)

Andy_R (114137) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452291)

So, we know Apple are calling in journalists from all over Europe, we know that in the iPhone launch presentation Steve Jobs said Europe would get the iPhone in Q3 2007, and we know there are only another 27 days of Q3 2007 left. So why are people jumping to the conclusion that this is a iPod launch?

Re:Sounds like the European iPhone launch to me (4, Informative)

De Lemming (227104) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452837)

we know that in the iPhone launch presentation Steve Jobs said Europe would get the iPhone in Q3 2007
No, he said Q4: "So here we are, and we're going to be shipping it in June in the U.S. We're going to Europe hopefully by the fourth calendar quarter of this year. And in Asia in 2008." (link [myiphone.com] )

iPods (-1)

styryx (952942) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452361)

My friend works for a hard-drive manufacturer. He told me that the memory miss rate in iPods is 1 in 100. 1% of the time it goes wrong. Compare that to commercial hard-drives where the memory miss is like 1 part in 10^18. I'm not completely certain on these stats, but they are close enough and demonstrate an orders of magnitude difference.

This is what makes the iPod possible, it's a clunky bit of hardware, but the human ear apparently cannot detect the 1 in 100 miss rate and so c'est la vie. Unless of course you haven't bought music in ages and don't charge your iPod using a computer, so no connection to PC. My music starts going missing, I lose songs/podcasts/pictures. I won't be buying another iPod, fancy touch screen or not, when it can't keep track of what songs are on it if you don't have it connected to the PC for a couple of weeks, plus the bit-rate and miss-rate can't be doing any good for my hearing, loudness and decibel filters aside.

Re:iPods (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452481)

WTF are you yapping on about?

Re:iPods (1)

sharrestom (531929) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452523)

I have never heard that comment about the miss rate. Ever. You would think after the years and tens of millions of iPods delivered that this would be well known. Further, you would expect that persons such as myself that primarily use a separate charger would have noticed. I think your friend is passing on some bad data.

Re:iPods (1)

kimble3 (736268) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452549)

Yeah, I smell bullshit. Besides, the iPods buffer the music so even if there was a read error there is plenty of time to re-read the data before it gets played....

Re:iPods (1)

e4g4 (533831) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452579)

Can you provide some non-anecdotal evidence to back this up? I can boot any number of machines off an OS installed on my iPod (handy to have one for diagnostic purposes), and it runs just as reliably as it does off an internal drive. With a 1 in 100 miss rate, that sure as hell would not be the case.

Re:iPods (1)

asc99c (938635) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452619)

That's a load of rubbish. Because of the compression (MP3 or AAC) the bits being wrong lead very quickly to extremely noticeable defects (clicking and popping noises) in the tracks. MP3 is quite robust and remains playable, but AVI files tend to get completely unplayable with a few bits changed in the wrong places. I've never had this problem or any data-loss problems on my iPod - I've had it once when burning a backup CD on a rewritable disc which must have been used too many times.

If you've got those problems with your iPod it's a defective unit. I can believe that iPod units may have a failure rate of 1 in 100 (which is actually very low compared to most modern gadgets), but on a properly functioning iPod, this memory miss rate isn't true.

Re:iPods (3, Interesting)

stevo3232 (794498) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452625)

That's complete bullshit. I regularly copy gigs upon gigs of data on and off my 80 gig ipod and I've /never/ had it corrupt anything. Ever. In fact, I just md5summed a DVD ISO that I shoved on there a few months ago and it's exactly the same as the one on my drive. With a "1 in 100" miss rate, there's no way that'd be possible.

Re:iPods (1)

hobbesmaster (592205) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453629)

When whatever component in a computer encounters a "miss" it goes to the layer below that and asks for the data again. You still get your data when a miss occurs, but it takes much longer. When a processor needs some data it goes to cache, if CPU cache doesn't have it, its a miss and it looks at RAM, if RAM doesn't have it its a miss and it goes to the hard drive. Within the hard drive there is a cache, if it isn't in there thats another miss, and then the hard drive spins up and goes to where that piece of data is. 1 in 100 is not that an unreasonable number for any of these steps, but the other number stated by the OP is, so odds are he completely misunderstood what his friend was saying and is not remembering the discussion correctly. Each time there is a miss, your data takes longer to be read by the processor, but the data is not degraded in any way.

You can look it up on wikipedia [wikipedia.org] if you want.
(yes, this post is something of a simplification of what really happens, and IANAEE... not yet anyways)

Re:iPods (1)

hobbit (5915) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453939)

Describing a cache miss to explain what the grandfather describes goes beyond generous and well into misleading. He talked about detection in the human ear, which has nothing to do with the cache. His friend presumably doesn't have anything to do with the engineering side of working for a hard drive manufacturer.

Re:iPods (1)

hobbesmaster (592205) | more than 6 years ago | (#20454013)

The stuff about the human ear was what the OP concluded from his friend's statements, not what his friend said, at least thats what I got out of the post. He ran with something somewhat correct to an entirely incorrect end.

At least, thats what I think his friend said. Think of it this way: I'm being nice to his friend, and very mean to the OP. ;)

may not be wireless (2, Interesting)

Jeremy_Bee (1064620) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452397)

There is a rumour that instead of wi-fi, the new iPod will use this technology:

http://lunchat.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/01/kleer .html [typepad.com]

thus it may not have any skype/wireless capabilities.

Re:may not be wireless (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453397)

While wireless headphones would be nice, it seems like just another thing to suck up more battery power. While it says it has low power usage (10x less than bluetooth), I'd much rather just have wired headphones. Plus what happens when one of those earbuds falls out of your ear when you're running? Even if it doesn't break when it hits the ground, somebody could step on it, or it could fall down a sewer grate.

Re:may not be wireless (4, Interesting)

Jeremy_Bee (1064620) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453877)

The way I understand it, the "Kleer" thing is an extra. There is nothing to stop people from using earbuds as well or instead of this.

It would conceivably allow Apple to produce an iPod with wireless like capabilities for sharing tunes and "squirting the social" (a la Zune), but not necessarily introduce the complexity of wireless and browsers and skype and so on. With Kleer, each iPod would be a broadcasting station and multiple wireless listeners could listen to the same iPod simultaneously. This would also figure in with the rumoured iPod "kiosks" that are said to be going up at Starbucks for selling iTunes to patrons.

I find it kind of believable because the technology is bleeding edge (typical Apple), it would instantly turn iPods into the highest quality audio devices out there (also typical Apple), and make it possible to do all those social things that were the Zune's only real innovation ("the social"), without all the DRM and legal complications. It's such a perfect solution, that if Apple doesn't use this technology or something very similar, the next Zune could run rings around them just by implementing it.

This is all wild rumour at this point however.

News? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20452455)

I may introduce an iPod Killer on Wednesday.

On the other hand, I may not.

Great news, huh?

European iPhone? (1)

Wormholio (729552) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452467)

Why go to BBC headquarters and ask European reporters to this presentation just to announce a new model of an existing product? Perhaps instead Steve will be announcing that the iPhone will soon be on sale in Europe. Unlocked, of course. AT&T's deal is only for the US, right?

Touchscreen seems nice at first... (1)

gluechucker (976140) | more than 6 years ago | (#20452859)

Touchscreen seems nice at first, but after a bit of thought, it adds flashiness, but takes away from usability. I like the physical controls that allow me to use my ipod without having to look at it. The edges of the scroll-circle-thing guide my fingers where they need to be without ever having to take it out of my pocket. Having this on a screen, while nice looking, would really screw with my aim.

Re:Touchscreen seems nice at first... (1)

sayfawa (1099071) | more than 6 years ago | (#20453113)

Yes, these touch screens are deal breakers with me as well. I just can't imagine how anyone could find it useful to be forced to take these things out of their pocket and look at it directly just to pause or turn the volume down. Bad for drivers too. Oh, and just wait 'till winter and you have gloves on. It's so much fun to expose my hand to freezing wind just to skip to the next song.

But, the flashiness of the touch screen seems to win out over common sense.

Re:Touchscreen seems nice at first... (1)

argent (18001) | more than 6 years ago | (#20454125)

Touchscreen seems nice at first, but after a bit of thought, it adds flashiness, but takes away from usability. I like the physical controls that allow me to use my ipod without having to look at it

Unfortunately that doesn't mean that Apple won't go that way. The iPod lost me because I can't use it without looking at it... I tried, but the UI just didn't become instinctive enough for me, and I ended up giving my iPod to my daughter and getting an iPod shuffle.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...