×

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!

How the iPod Touch Works

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the need-to-roll-out-wifi-syncing-in-an-update dept.

208

starexplorer2001 writes "The iPod Touch isn't in stores yet, but HowStuffWorks has a nice summary of how the 'touch' part of the iPod Touch works. Very similar to how the iPhone works, without those pesky rebates! From the article: 'The iPod touch also has a few other features that iPod enthusiasts had hoped to see on standard iPod models. Some users hoped for a wirelessly enabled iPod so they could synch their music or share files with friends over a Bluetooth or WiFi connection. The iPod touch is the first iPod to have wireless capability, although it doesn't use it to synch with a computer or friends' iPods. Instead, you can use it to browse the Web, watch YouTube videos or download music from a WiFi-specific iTunes Music Store. With its widescreen display and WiFi capability, the iPod touch might sound like a big step up from older iPod models. But the iPod touch isn't for everyone.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

208 comments

CmdrTaco's dream come true! (4, Funny)

nacturation (646836) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603319)

They finally listened to his comments [slashdot.org] ! Now with wireless and *more* space than a Nomad.
 

Steve Jobs is Gay Secks (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20603411)

lol apple...

If I am modded down, that makes me more powerful. This post is intended to waste one modpoint, r-o-f-f-l-e!!

Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20603441)

The comments on that thread make for interesting reading today - I particularly like this one (modded +4 insightful)

Raise your hand if you have iTunes ...

Raise your hand if you have a FireWire port ...

Raise your hand if you have both ...

Raise your hand if you have $400 to spend on a cute Apple device ...

There is Apple's market. Pretty slim, eh? I don't see many sales in the future of iPod.

Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20603475)

You do realize that comment was true at the time, right? Two things have changed since then:

iTunes now runs under windows.

iPods now only work with USB. (I once made the mistake of using a Firewire iPod cable with a 5G iPod. The iPod itself will display an error message. It simply doesn't support Firewire any more.)

It was only AFTER Apple supported Windows and the iPod gained USB support that the iPod took off. Before then it was only a curiosity enjoyed by Apple fanbois.

Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! (4, Informative)

Mattintosh (758112) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604247)

It simply doesn't support Firewire any more.

The first time I heard this, I was shocked and dismayed. Every time I've heard it since, I've been angry.

Via USB, my iPod takes 15 to 20 minutes to transfer my 18 GB of music.

Via Firewire, the same operation takes 8 minutes.

Why am I forced to put up with inferior mechanisms when I replace it? New iPods suck ass because of stupid people that don't know that Firewire is better. This isn't just simple anger, this is pure hate. I hate idiots and the stupidity they cause.

4G iPod forever! (Or at least until Apple puts Firewire support back in.)

Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604503)

iPods now only work with USB. (I once made the mistake of using a Firewire iPod cable with a 5G iPod. The iPod itself will display an error message. It simply doesn't support Firewire any more.)


Actually, to transfer files you need USB. To charge a 5/5.5G iPod, FireWire works great. (I use the old Firewire adapter that came with my 3G iPod to charge). Don't know if it charges any faster, though, but it certainly means I don't need my PC to charge it, or buy another adapter.

Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603495)

It just goes to show you that knowing what is sucessful and what isn't a science. More power vs. Smaller size? More features vs. Simpler Design... It is really hit or miss. At slasdot we tend to prefer thinks with More Power and Features vs. Smaller and Simpler. But in terms of music players it seems Smaller and Simpler seems to win. Then overtime more features can creep in. During the time of the comment Apples track record had gone up from lousy to hit or miss. CmdrTaco's comment basicly had a 75% chance of being correct.

Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! (0, Offtopic)

brettmosleymaui (1146351) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604279)

If your iPod touch breaks or you just want cash for it used, go to www.buymybrokenipod.com Dont be scared.

Re:CmdrTaco's dream come true! (2, Funny)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604327)

They finally listened to his comments! Now with wireless and *more* space than a Nomad. [wikipedia.org]

Plus, it has paradox-absorbing crumple zones.

But does it have Bluetooth or not? (4, Insightful)

Brit_in_the_USA (936704) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603327)

Anyone taken one apart and verified if there is bluetooth hardware in it?

Stereo bluetoth headphone support is long overdue for ipods. If hte hardware is there software coudl be round the corner?

Re:But does it have Bluetooth or not? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20603489)

What makes you think you can ask an intellegent question at Slashdot without risking the wrath of the SlashDrones? Your post was modded "Redundent" for not rational reason. Who knows? OH, I know! You insulted Apple. Did you not know that SlashDrones *lust* after Steve Jobs in homosexual fantisies?

Re:But does it have Bluetooth or not? (4, Interesting)

MBCook (132727) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603691)

What's so important about BT headphones? I'm sorry but that is one thing that I don't see a big deal about. That's just extra power that my iPod will be wasting and another thing to charge/replace batteries in (the headphones). There are a few circumstances I can see (jogging, maybe). But I don't think it is a big necessary thing for most people.

That said, if the BT hardware is in there (like it is in the iPhone), I see no excuse for not including support for it (because all the hardware is there and I can see people using). I just don't see it as important enough to put the hardware in.

Now wireless syncing, I would be big on.

Re:But does it have Bluetooth or not? (1)

Splab (574204) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603759)

Well you said it, jogging. My left earphone often falls out when I'm out jogging because the movement makes the wires jump and that pulls out the earplug. And in general I could see it as a big bonus, I always end up entangled in wires, bags and groceries (I use public transportation).

Re:But does it have Bluetooth or not? (1)

Puff of Logic (895805) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603773)

There are a few circumstances I can see (jogging, maybe).
This is the big one for me. I very much enjoy a bit of music or a thought-provoking podcast while I run, and not having to worry about a wire flapping around my neck would be lovely.

How the iPod Touch Works? (4, Funny)

svendsen (1029716) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603343)

it works by touching it...duh

Re: How the iPod Touch Works? (2, Funny)

garcia (6573) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603523)

it works by touching it...duh

Well, most of the Slashdot is very well aware that they themselves "work by touching it" but for use of their own devices outside of that realm, they need to have a little more in-depth manual and this is exactly that! ;-)

Re: How the iPod Touch Works? (3, Funny)

svendsen (1029716) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603579)

You just put the image of slashdot users touching themselves into my head....after I am done barfing remind me to put you on my enemies list for that :-) lol

Re: How the iPod Touch Works? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20603847)

Yeah, but can I touch it with my penis? Thats the real question.

But what if it's in my pocket? (5, Insightful)

TheCycoONE (913189) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603381)

One of the great features of the clicky wheel is that you can grab your ipod in your pocket and adjust the volume or skip tracks easily without looking at the device. On a multi-touch interface you're going to have to look at the screen to know what you are touching, which will make it a lot harder to use in your pocket or while driving.

Re:But what if it's in my pocket? (1)

EMeta (860558) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603641)

I'm sure there will be accessories that will have button capability, either with the headphones or the aux out ports. These are already out there for the regular iPods, & they don't need them half as much. I would count the full price of any iPT to include a sleeve and said accessory

Re:But what if it's in my pocket? (1)

pthor1231 (885423) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603767)

It's still kind of annoying to have to include accessories into the cost though. They seem to be getting better about the screens, which leads me to believe you could do away with the sleeve/case. Why can't they just toss in a wired remote too? The cost to them wouldn't be much, and it could I'm a lot of people, like GPP, would appreciate it.

Re:But what if it's in my pocket? (2, Informative)

MrP-(at work) (839979) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603757)

I know with my iPhone I can easily click the volume up/down button on the side in my pocket and I can stop/start/skip ahead songs using the button/microphone on the headphones. (which can also answer calls, send to vm, place on hold, etc). iPod touch probably has a similar feature.

Re:But what if it's in my pocket? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20603861)

One of the great features of the clicky wheel is that you can grab your ipod in your pocket and adjust the volume or skip tracks easily without looking at the device.

No, really Mom! I was just adjusting my iPod!

Re:But what if it's in my pocket? (4, Interesting)

samkass (174571) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603997)

Apple still sells iPods with clicky wheels if this is important to you, but the clicky wheel and the huge screen won't both fit, so you have to choose. You can get accessories that let you go forward/back without touching the iPod at all, but of course they cost extra, and most car models these days offer optional iPod integration that lets you control them from the car stereo for car use.

Not a PDA replacement... (4, Interesting)

porcupine8 (816071) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603385)

I was originally super-excited about the iPod Touch as a PDA, but I just found out that you can't enter calendar entries on it, you can only sync them from your computer. :( Oh well, now I don't have to be sad about the price!

The part of this article that I found most interesting is that you need to use your skin for the touch screen to work - that kinda rules out any sort of future handwriting recognition.

I guess I just really want Apple to give me a real PDA - an iNewton - instead of an iPod that looks kinda like a PDA.

Re:Not a PDA replacement... (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603519)

Quit waiting for Apple to re-enter the PDA market, because I doubt it will happen. Jobs thinks PDAs are destined to become obsolete:

There are no plans to make a tablet. It turns out people want keyboards. When Apple first started out, "People couldn't type. We realized: Death would eventually take care of this." "We look at the tablet and we think it's going to fail." Tablets appeal to rich guys with plenty of other PCs and devices already. "And people accuse us of niche markets." I get a lot of pressure to do a PDA. What people really seem to want to do with these is get the data out . We believe cell phones are going to carry this information. We didn't think we'd do well in the cell phone business. What we've done instead is we've written what we think is some of the best software in the world to start syncing information between devices. We believe that mode is what cell phones need to get to. We chose to do the iPod instead of a PDA. -- Steve Jobs from a 2003 Mac Observer interview [macobserver.com]


So I doubt Apple will ever make another PDA; instead, they'll focus on the iPhone. Look for more iPhone models in the future.

Re:Not a PDA replacement... (3, Interesting)

porcupine8 (816071) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603857)

Aaaaand he also said publicly many times that Apple wasn't making a phone. I don't trust anything he denies in public.

I read somewhere that Apple was approached by a team wanting them to create a tablet for medical use - and they said that touch-screen technology wasn't up to where it needed to be for such a device to be as good as they'd want to make it. They didn't say that they would never consider such a device, or that people wouldn't want it - just that it wasn't currently feasible.

By PDA, I just mean I want something that I can enter scheduling and to do info into on the go, rather than at my computer. It doesn't seem like it would be hard to make the iPod touch do this, and probably a third party will do it soon.

Now, a true tablet Mac, that's really my dream-come-true, and I think it will happen eventually. No, not everyone wants or needs one, but I think there's enough of a niche market for it that if Apple could do it really well, they'd do it. But as the anecdote above shows, they won't do it until they know they can do it better than anyone else.

Re:Not a PDA replacement... (1)

WillAdams (45638) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603525)

Agreed.

If it included support for using a stylus and had InkWell handwriting recognition, I would finally be able to replace my Newton MessagePad --- instead, I guess I'll just get another Fujitsu Stylistic, which will preclude my getting a MacBook (or Axion ModBook), which is a shame since I prefer Mac OS X.

Hopefully when Leopard comes out it'll be feasible to run it on a Tablet PC.

William

Re:Not a PDA replacement... (2, Interesting)

chis101 (754167) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603535)

The part of this article that I found most interesting is that you need to use your skin for the touch screen to work - that kinda rules out any sort of future handwriting recognition.


Not necessarily. I wouldn't expect to see handwriting recognition, but you have to use your skin because touchpads detect the electrical difference caused by your finger. Non-conductors won't work for a touchpad. That doesn't mean, however, that there can't be a special pen that can be used to write on it (like PDAs have)

Re:Not a PDA replacement... (1)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603541)

So, when it comes out, "Jailbreak" it and install a suite of "real" PDA apps. It's not as if this won't be the iPod Homebrewer's dream.

Re:Not a PDA replacement... (1)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603733)

The part of this article that I found most interesting is that you need to use your skin for the touch screen to work - that kinda rules out any sort of future handwriting recognition.

I guess I just really want Apple to give me a real PDA - an iNewton - instead of an iPod that looks kinda like a PDA.

That's okay; PDA screens are physically too small for decent handwriting recognition anyway (let alone the fact that they also really need a higher-resolution (i.e., subpixel) digitizer). Now, a Tablet PC can do decent handwriting recognition. But a PDA? Any PDA? No way!

Re:Not a PDA replacement... (1)

jonwil (467024) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603739)

Just wait for the hackers to find a way to copy the apps from the iPhone to the iPod Touch.

Slashdot (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20603391)

I keep forgetting this is slashdot. Let me make sure everything conforms. Love Linux hate anything Microsoft (n/a for this story) Hate all Republicans love all Democrats (n/a for this story) If it is free love it, if not hate it unless it is cool (n/a for this story) If it is made by Mac and not being compared to Linux Love it (Check) If it comes with the source love it, if not hate it (n/a for this story) If it is about Intel hate it, if it is AMD love it (n/a for this story) Ok this is a good Slashdot Story. Flame away :)

It IS in stores (1)

danfromsb (965115) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603393)

There are reports of the iPod touch being in stores already.

Re:It IS in stores (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20603597)

In Japan, the 16GB model is due out in stores on the 28th as comapred to the 8GB model which will be out on the 30th. I will probably be an early adopter and go for the 16GB rightaway. On a slightly different note - The improvised PSP (with TV out) was on my wishlist (due to be out on the 20th), but looks like the iPod Touch will be getting my moolah this month.

Storage is the biggest limitation (3, Insightful)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603405)

$400 for 16 gigabytes of storage is simply not good enough for a lot of people with large music libraries who like to have 30-40 albums to listen to on command.

I like to watch video on these portable players (I have a Cowon A2 myself), so there's also seasons of anime or whatever to take up 4-8 gigs each.

In a year or so, when these things will hold 64 Gigs of flash memory, they will be great purchases for someone like myself. Until then, they're not even an option. And that's the single biggest "improvement" I'm looking forward to in future iPods. (Though I'll probably just grab a Q5 when it's available.)

But hey gotta start somewhere.

Re:Storage is the biggest limitation (1)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603491)

$400 for 16 gigabytes of storage is simply not good enough for a lot of people with large music libraries who like to have 30-40 albums to listen to on command.

Buddy, I have 900+ original CDs that I've MP3ed up that takes up around 100GB of disk space.

30-40 albums is not a large music collection, believe me!

Re:Storage is the biggest limitation (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603595)

I didn't mean to say that 30-40 albums is a large music collection, hehe. I have a LOT of music on my computer as well (probably 70 gigs? not sure anymore...) but I only really bother to throw 30-40 albums onto a portable media player because they're the ones I listen to for a year or something.

utter bs (0, Troll)

sam_paris (919837) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603687)

My itunes library is around 45GB, thats 22 days 14 hours in playtime.

The best MP3 players in the world can barely manage 30 hours of playback. Anyone thats says they "need" to carry around 100GB of music is talking utter crap.

I'm willing to bet that most people with more than 30GB haven't listened to every song they own. I know I haven't I probably have about 15 or so albums i've never listened to (and im not proud of it) and I know a lot of my friends are similar... but its SO IMPORTANT to carry them around with me at all times.

To be honest I think it's more of an ego thing for people like the parent poster, they need to have as much music as possible with them at all times. These type of people download the entire discography of the doors (about 30 albums) just to say they have it, not because they love the doors..

Re:utter bs (4, Interesting)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603839)

Anyone thats says they "need" to carry around 100GB of music is talking utter crap.

I don't "need" to carry around 100GB of music with me - I "like" to have it with me because I listen to a lot of music, it sits in a small DVD case on 25 DVDs alongside my laptop so I can copy stuff off to my MP3 player any time I like.

I'm willing to bet that most people with more than 30GB haven't listened to every song they own.

Wrong. I don't watch much TV, I have music on in the background most of the time and generally find an hour or two each day to just sit and listen to some music.

To be honest I think it's more of an ego thing for people like the parent poster, they need to have as much music as possible with them at all times.

Wrong again. 25 DVDs in a small case is simple enough to stick in a laptop bag and forget about. It's just "easy" to have my music collection with me most times, it makes no odds what other people think.

These type of people download the entire discography of the doors (about 30 albums) just to say they have it, not because they love the doors..

Who said anything about downloading? Yep, I download from BitTorrent or Usenet occasionally to preview an album - but if it's good, I buy the CD and make my own MP3s, if it's crap then I delete it. MP3s are just a convenience for me, I much prefer the disc to play in a reasonably good hifi - but I've never paid to download music and never will.

Suffice it to say, I don't earn enough to buy the entire catalogue of an artist. I buy what I like, and that's it.

Re:utter bs (2, Interesting)

sam_paris (919837) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604071)

I don't "need" to carry around 100GB of music with me - I "like" to have it with me because I listen to a lot of music, it sits in a small DVD case on 25 DVDs alongside my laptop so I can copy stuff off to my MP3 player any time I like. Just a minute, this debate is about mp3 players, if you choose to carry around 25DVD's at all times that's your problem. Maybe you should think about buying a 100GB+ mp3 player.

Even though I know you won't ever agree, i'm sure in that 100GB of music there are plenty of songs that you can't remember when you last listened to them.

Wrong. I don't watch much TV, I have music on in the background most of the time and generally find an hour or two each day to just sit and listen to some music.

If you have about 100GB of music that equals over 1000 hours of playback. If you listen to only an hour a day, that means to listen to your whole collection would take OVER A YEAR. That means, that there must be some songs you barely ever listen to. Straight from your own mouth!

Who said anything about downloading? Yep, I download from BitTorrent or Usenet occasionally to preview an album - but if it's good, I buy the CD and make my own MP3s, if it's crap then I delete it. MP3s are just a convenience for me, I much prefer the disc to play in a reasonably good hifi - but I've never paid to download music and never will. Suffice it to say, I don't earn enough to buy the entire catalogue of an artist. I buy what I like, and that's it.


Yeah, sure you bought all that music.. if you dont earn enough to buy an entire back catalogue, you dont earn enough to have 100GB which, is probably over 1000 albums..

Re:utter bs (3, Informative)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604361)

Even though I know you won't ever agree, i'm sure in that 100GB of music there are plenty of songs that you can't remember when you last listened to them.

I can tell you that I've listened to them all at some point, I can't tell you an exact day. My collection's a bit fluid anyway, in as much as there's the occasional CD I've lost interest in that I resell on eBay but I do get through them. Sure, having an album on in the background isn't truly "listening" to it but I do have music on around 4 hours a day.

Yeah, sure you bought all that music.. if you dont earn enough to buy an entire back catalogue, you dont earn enough to have 100GB which, is probably over 1000 albums..

I'm in my 40s, I've been listening to the likes of Yes, Genesis, Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd since I was about 13 years of age, as well as rock I now listen to blues, Motown, some electronic stuff like Tangerine Dream and Mark Shreeve and even a bit of classical.

I never buy CDs in high street shops, look for the best prices and buy used on eBay and in local shops. I can ***100%*** guarantee you that I have 900+ original, non-copied CDs. With that size of collection, there is no point my downloading and hoarding stuff because I just wouldn't find the time to listen to it - like I said, it's a great way of previewing stuff that I can't hear on the radio, nothing more.

Re:utter bs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20604281)

I don't watch much TV, I have music on in the background most of the time and generally find an hour or two each day to just sit and listen to some music.

And your sig says:

My recipe for "Leek, Potato And Elitist Minority Soup"... Peel and slice 6 Leeks, 6 Potatoes and 1 Apple user...

Dear Mr Pot, I have a friend I'd like you to meet, his name is Mr Kettle. I think you'll find you have a lot in common.

Re:utter bs (0, Flamebait)

Leftist Troll (825839) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604027)

The best MP3 players in the world can barely manage 30 hours of playback. Anyone thats says they "need" to carry around 100GB of music is talking utter crap.

Are you kidding me? Obviously you're not going to listen to your entire collection in one outing, the point is that you have it all at your disposal so you can listen to anything on a whim. That, and there's a lot more material to shuffle.

If a few albums should be "good enough" for me, I might as well dust off the Walkman and start making tapes again.

I'm willing to bet that most people with more than 30GB haven't listened to every song they own. To be honest I think it's more of an ego thing for people like the parent poster, they need to have as much music as possible with them at all times.

Pure speculative bullshit. Stop defending Apple's queer design decision and admit that 16GB is not enough for some people.

Re:utter bs (1)

sam_paris (919837) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604165)

It's not speculative, it's an observation of a lot of my friends and acquaintances listening habits. Back at college, people used to swap and download music purely to boast of how much they had. Plenty of people had entire Beatles, Pink Floyd collections yet hadn't listened to them at all.

In fact, some people I know have so much music it is entirely non feasible to listen to, as the duration of the music is longer than the amount of time they have had the music!

Re:utter bs (1)

Leftist Troll (825839) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604267)

OK, I'll concede that there are people out there who fit your description.

Will you concede that it doesn't apply to everyone, and for some of us, 16GB really isn't enough?

Re:utter bs (1)

sam_paris (919837) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604521)

Yeah i'll concede to that. In fact, I was sort of playing devils advocate, since 16GB isn't really enough for me either (I have a 60GB ipod 6th Gen)

Re:utter bs (1)

Joe Jay Bee (1151309) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604509)

I'm willing to bet that most people with more than 30GB haven't listened to every song they own.

Hah, I've only (only) got 15gb of music, and I've barely scratched the surface of it.

Re:utter bs (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604549)

I only "carry around" the music I listen to regularly. It just happens to be a lot of music because I listen to it while at work. I might listen to as much as 25-30 hours of music a week this way. So, my Cowon's 30 gig HD is about 2/3 full as a result (though some of that is anime that I have on there for long plane flights or train rides or whatever).

It's not an ego thing at all... I listen to a lot of music. And yes I have the entire discography of a number of bands, but I really do like them a lot and have listened to every song at least once. But, I'm a big music afficionado.

Re:Storage is the biggest limitation (1)

ajs (35943) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603905)

$400 for 16 gigabytes of storage is simply not good enough for a lot of people with large music libraries who like to have 30-40 albums to listen to on command.
Right now, I get by on my 30GB iPod, and if I had half the space I'd just delete a lot of the junk I never listen to and some of the video podcasts that are kind of large, and I really don't ever watch unless I'm connected to my TV.

Average file size for a decent bitrate of song is around 3-5MB, right? So, you're talking about roughly 4000 songs. Now granted, that's not the whole library of someone who has ripped an extensive collection of CDs, but it's quite enough to carry around.

I'm also very happy with the storage size due to the fact that it's 16GB of solid-state memory, so there's never a problem with bouncing it around.

Re:Storage is the biggest limitation (1)

pieaholicx (1148705) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603573)

I seriously don't like how people jump on the size that the touch holds at this point. I can pretty much guarantee that this is intended to be a release to get a new toy out there, get feedback on it, then make a new and improved one. So the size is small, big deal. I seriously don't think they intended for this to be the ultimated media player solution.

Oh, and don't forget that their biggest seller is in fact the tiny (in size and space) nano.

Re:Storage is the biggest limitation (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603633)

Hey hey it's fair enough to jump on the size. Same thing as "jumping on the price" of the PS3 which everyone knows will go down over the system's lifespan.

Performance goes up, price goes down (relatively). The usual. But that doesn't mean people can't in the meantime comment on the iPhone's/iPod Touch's small storage, or the PS3's price, or the price of standalone HD players or 1080p TVs, or whatever.

Anyway I did say "gotta start somewhere" in my OP so it's not like I'm saying it was a mistake to release...

Re:Storage is the biggest limitation (1)

Pope (17780) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603649)

Bollocks. It's about picking which albums to listen to at any one time. I have way more music than I know will fit on any current player (hell, or my old 10GB iPod 5 years ago!), so I pick and choose. The "I MUST have every single song in my collection at all times!!" demand is such a red herring.

Re:Storage is the biggest limitation (4, Insightful)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603743)

The "I MUST have every single song in my collection at all times!!" demand is such a red herring.

Well, these days it's somewhat reasonable to expect a device to exist that will hold the music collections of everyone who isn't a professional DJ. That said, such a device exists: the full-size regular iPod. What's not reasonable is to expect every music player on the market to hold all the music you could possibly own.

Re:Storage is the biggest limitation (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603851)

Yes but who said that's what is expected in the first place? I'm not saying "omg wtf the iPod Touch doesn't have enough space for my 70 gigs of music!1!??" I'm saying that storage increase is IMO the most welcome improvement to the device at the moment. Disagree?

Re:Storage is the biggest limitation (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603887)

With your reasoning 10 megabytes should be enough :-) pick and choose, pick and choose, yeah?

The less I have to constantly figure out what to delete to make room for music I *now* feel like listening to, the better. Convenience through technology :-)

Re:Storage is the biggest limitation (1)

jonnythan (79727) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604401)

30-40 albums is less than 3GB at 128kbps.

Even at 320kbps, you're looking at less than 10GB.

Deliciously hackable (2, Insightful)

maczealot (864883) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603409)

Just as the iPhone's "exclusive" with AT&T was only a speed bump to those who wanted to use it on any network so too will the iTouch's inability to share music wirelessly with friends only exist for a short time.

I expect there to be multiple hacks for sharing music wirelessly with friends within a month after it hits stores. And to be honest I'm starting to expect this kind of wink-wink nudge-nudge release from Apple. They can't release a product the way consumers want it so they get the recording industry/telecom industy to agree to "rules" that just make their devices likely targets of benign hacking.

Now, I KNOW what my account name is but you HAVE to admit that Apple's use of the greater software community pwns Microsoft who regularly attracts NEGATIVE hacking.

And just to prove what a fanboy I am: This is the first device since the Newton that I'm wetting my pants over.

Re:Deliciously hackable (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603575)

WRT the MS statement, to be fair given all of the open source and otherwise free software out there that folks write to make life with Windows easier, or for some added functionality, or whatever, it probably shouldn't be said that MS doesn't make good use of the greater software community.

With regards to non-OS products, I have no clue what kind of "hacking" the Zune has attracted (from personal experience though it's a total POS and no amount of "hacking" will make it not suck donkey dong but that's an aside), but the original Xbox was modded frequently and not really in "negative" ways (though unappreciated by MS since it was mostly for piracy).

MS attracts "negative" hacking because it's so dominant. Apple would too if its OS had such a large user base. As for "negatively hacking" a media player, well yeah that doesn't really happen to anyone :-)

So, it's not really a valid comparison I guess...

Anyway concerning your main point of a hack coming, yeah I wouldn't doubt it :-) I don't know how Apple officially/unofficially responds to such modding, but if they aren't making any real efforts to stem it I suppose that's admirable in some way.

Re:Deliciously hackable (1)

Toby_Tyke (797359) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603613)

Personally, I'm waiting for the hack that lets it play xvid encoded videos. Once that's taken care of, I'll be buying one of these. Which will make it the first apple product I have ever owned.

Re:Deliciously hackable (0, Redundant)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603637)

Just as the iPhone's "exclusive" with AT&T was only a speed bump to those who wanted to use it on any network
No, it wasn't. The iPhone can be hacked to work without AT&T service, but it can't be hacked to work on a different network.

Re:Deliciously hackable (1)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603795)

And to be honest I'm starting to expect this kind of wink-wink nudge-nudge release from Apple. They can't release a product the way consumers want it so they get the recording industry/telecom industy to agree to "rules" that just make their devices likely targets of benign hacking.

If that were the case, Apple would have released a real SDK.

Re:Deliciously hackable (1)

hansamurai (907719) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603883)

Apple's use of the greater software community pwns Microsoft who regularly attracts NEGATIVE hacking.
I have to refute that claim by simply pointing at the Xbox. Modding (hard or soft) an Xbox and installing XBMC [xboxmediacenter.com] "pwns" any hack/mod I've ever seen anywhere else, Apple product or not.

Re:Deliciously hackable (1)

maczealot (864883) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604239)

When I see the FBI knocking down doors to prevent people from using T-Mobile with their iPhones I will agree with you.

Re:Deliciously hackable (1)

Reality Master 101 (179095) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604111)

Now, I KNOW what my account name is but you HAVE to admit that Apple's use of the greater software community pwns Microsoft who regularly attracts NEGATIVE hacking.

Well, the primary difference is that Microsoft doesn't enforce jack-booted control over their devices, so you don't *have* to hack them to do positive things.

I recently bought an iPhone (I really need to do a journal entry about this), and it's so good that it actually makes me hate Apple even more than I have in the past. The idiots over there cripple it so badly and in such stupid ways. It's absolutely maddening. And I never thought I'd find an application that I hate more than Quicktime, but iTunes is the WORST freaking music manager I could even imagine. God, it is a buggy, terrible piece of garbage. (Maybe they're better on the Mac than on Windows where I use it, but you'd think the interface would be the same)

I definitely need to post my iPhone review and let out some of this frustration. :)

Wait a week... (1)

Cervantes (612861) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603413)

I'm just going to wait a week, till someone hacks it to do 802.11G and bluetooth headsets.
THEN it'll be the product we've all been waiting for!

I hear Apple has a prototype that does just that, but in true Apple fashion, it's wire-wrapped by hand, weighs 47lbs, and for some reason there's a Sony rep hidden in the closet...

Re:Wait a week... (1)

Renaissance 2K (773059) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603501)

While hacking is a glorious thing, if such a thing can be enabled so easily, Apple had better play the "less evil" card and release such functionality as a firmware upgrade down the road, instead of forcing people to shell out for the next generation of the device when the time comes.

Defective By Design (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20603415)

So what you're saying is due to the wireless limitations, this thing is *defective by design*.

Way to go, Apple.

really (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603425)

To me the iTouch is a waste of money...I suppose it could make a PDA, but really you can get better PDA's for less money...they just don't have the storage space that makes up the whole purpose of buying an iPod in the first place.

But what do I know, I use a Rio Karma...

Re:really (4, Interesting)

Poromenos1 (830658) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603529)

The thing is that it has 5 times less storage than the older iPod (80 GB). Sure it's got touch and wireless, but that just means no tactile feedback, no wireless syncing (I have many computers around the house, even my mobile has a browser) and less space at a higher price. Not the most attractive deal.

only for the sexy people (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20603467)

But the iPod touch isn't for everyone.


That's right... if you have to look at the price, you obviously should have one. Apple is only for the sexy people. And by sexy, we mean wealthy. And by people, we mean label whores.

Wireless Sync (1)

MBCook (132727) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603583)

Wireless sync is all I care about. That would make my life much easier. I've got a 40GB 3rd gen and I really like it, but I don't have a lot of reason to move up. I probably buy the either the 16GB touch or the 80GB classic. Not sue which. But I would have bought one of those two very fast.

As it is, the only compelling reason for me to upgrade is the video ability. The surfing on the Touch seems neat, but it isn't enough for me. I am not using the video now. TiVo announced that they will bring TiVoToGo to the Series 3 this November, and if that works for me (I'm on a Mac, so you never know) then I may get one.

My current iPod is functional as I need.

Like I said, wireless sync would do it. So would open development on the touch (I'd love to play with that). They are quite nice, and if I had more of a need for a new iPod I'd grab one of those models. But I replaced the battery in my iPod last year so other than a few little scratches from 4+ years of use, it's as good as new.

Re:Wireless Sync (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20603823)

I don't really see the point in wireless sync. I have to charge my iPod far more often than I need to sync it. Since I need to hook it to the wires to charge it anyway, I might as well do the syncing at the same time.

I'm waiting a bit (4, Insightful)

TeamSPAM (166583) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603585)

As a long time Apple fanboy, I'll invoke the don't buy the rev a rule on the iPod Touch. To an extent, the Touch is what I wanted when I saw the iPhone. Unfortunately, the storage space isn't big enough for my music collection. I'd like to have at least 32GB of storage available before I think about buying one.

This should be a short article (3, Insightful)

Itchyeyes (908311) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603615)

Sounds like this would be a pretty short article: "Exactly the same way the iPhone does, but without the phone."

This Slashvertisment rates a 4.7 out of 5 (5, Insightful)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603623)

This Slashvertisment rates a 4.7 out of 5.

The (product) isn't in stores yet, but (whatever) has a nice summary of how the ("gee whiz" feature) of the (product) works.


Excellent opening statement. It stimulates Desire, which we all know is the precursor to in the marketing "AIDA" scheme. (And when you release the product, just submit another article.)

With its (feature 2) and (feature 3), the (product) might sound like a big step up from (previous model of product). But the (product) isn't for everyone.


Great introduction of the features, especially the "big step up" part. And you've even given your target audience a reason to click into the submitted link too. (You've suggested there are people this product may not be perfect for, not that anyone reading this on Slashdot would fall into that "un-hip" category.)

Fellow Slashvertisers take note - this format can be applied to your next submission too!

Re:This Slashvertisment rates a 4.7 out of 5 (1)

Hijacked Public (999535) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603981)

This was one of the better ones, and reads like it was written by a professional marketing person.

But that could always backfire, since the Slashdot crowd has strong anti-marketing leanings you have to be pretty careful. The thing that impressed me about the iPhone Slashvertisement barrage was that a good many of the 'submissions' came off as amateur, which I think you'd pretty much have to do if you are buying two front page stories a day, every day, for a month.

But it was refreshing to read this one and it more or less confirms that advertisers are taking this place seriously. I always found the "Ruby on Rails" Slashvertisements a little worrying because they were so obviously paid ads, and not even good ones. They read like they were tossed together by some Ruby programming consultant with halfway marginal skill with prose.

Give Up on The Wireless Hacking (3, Interesting)

asphaltjesus (978804) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603731)

Let's pause for a moment to inject a dose of engineering reality.

1. We're talking about a low-power device with very limited programming capacity. That's different from the storage capacity.
2. How, in technical terms will files be shared?

Let's say a hacker can use the wireless+dhcp client. Then what? A bonjour client perhaps? Maybe, but bonjour just advertises services. So, put an ftp server behind that maybe? Great! The hacker will need, Bonjour libraries and all the underlying dependencies, an ftp server and an ftp client and enough cpu/memory to run it all. It reminds me of a line from the remade Oceans 11, "Let's say you rob Terry Benedict's casino. You're still in the middle of the f*cking desert!"

Re:Give Up on The Wireless Hacking (1)

p0tat03 (985078) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603939)

Er... As far as we can tell this thing runs the exact same hardware (CPU, RAM, etc) as the iPhone. We already know it has a subset of the OS X API available, and there's "plenty" of RAM (64MB I believe) and a decently fast x86 CPU. How is this limited programming capacity? Especially when compared to other PDAs on the market?

Re:Give Up on The Wireless Hacking (1)

djupedal (584558) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604431)

"How, in technical terms will files be shared?"

I run a nice little OSS item by the name of 'MyTunesRSS [codewave.de] '. MTRSS scans your iTunes library, fires up a little Bonjour webserver & bam.

Any device that runs a web client can login and browse by different schemes. You can click and listen to existing playlists or create new ones... or click and download via RSS. MTRSS will even zip up files you queue for download and send that one file along asap.

Trivial, actually, especially since Apple did such a bronzed job of building RSS capability into iTunes :)

There is a trimmed-down free version and a full-featured paid license version that includes these features:
  • Flash player for playback directly in your browser
  • Unlimited user accounts (free edition: 3 user)
  • Unlimited watch folder (free edition: 1 folder)
  • Run MyTunesRSS without GUI and configure it via JMX
  • Create and use a mytunesrss.com account
  • Upload files to the server via the web interface
  • Optional download limit per day/week/month for a user
  • Set maximum number of files in a ZIP archive per user
  • User may (optionally) change his password in the web interface
  • Discover other MyTunesRSS server on the local network

eBook? (2, Interesting)

fxj (267709) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603747)

Can you use it as an e-book reader?
or at least store html-pages on it?

iPod Touch == Crippled iPhone (4, Interesting)

Coppit (2441) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603831)

They disabled appointment entry for the calendar widget. [engadget.com] That's really too bad, since I was hoping that this device could be the convergence of my Palm T|X and my iPod. Does anyone know if they crippled any other features of the iPhone? I would have bought one if it truly was an iPhone minus the phone. (I refuse to give AT&T $1500 on top of the not-even-subsidized cost of the iPhone [business2.com] .)

I guess the other thing I'm waiting for is an API for programmers. I like to store my passwords and PINs using encryption on my device. (1) Storing them on someone's server using their Safari-based web app won't work, and (2) Hacks people are using to write native apps aren't sanctioned and may stop working in the future. Sigh... C'mon Apple, open it up!

16 gigs? (1)

rubberbandball (1076739) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604101)

it's pretty. moving on.. the addition of flash memory is the greatest thing that the touch has going for it. but why so small? would it really cost that much more to produce a 20/40 gig version of this? flash memory has come down in price exponentially in the past 2 years, most of the chain electronics retailers sell flash drives for around $10/gig, as opposed to almost $150 for a 1 gig drive a few years ago. sure apple has to make a profit, and i'm certain they pay less than $10/gig for flash memory. more goes onto an ipod these days than just un-converted MP3 files, the space is the real luxury behind these little white boxes. maybe a now "classic ipod" could be released as a 40/80 gig flash, instead of the "classic" hard drive enclosure that it is.

apple quietly replies to diagnostic menu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20604253)

So I was browsing on the latest touch ipod news this am and I noticed this post when reading about the diagnostic menu that some ipods are coming with...

"
HINT: The Cereal box is the key to returning it back to the main OS X. Hidden submenu, requiring a certain touches on the screen.

Apple said this on September 14th, 2007 at 2:02 pm
"

the word apple is a link to apple.com
I wonder if they are that on the news about their products or is this just someone having fun?

good to have the feeling you're the best! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20604457)

Look, no one is saying that this is a self-esteem issue or that all apples customers are unable to express themselves without getting their credit-cards out, but sometimes you have to wonder eh!

So, given how vocal this minority are, there has to be more to this than meets the eye; indeed there is a definite psychological pay-off for certain groups - they like to isolate themselves and make a real mission out of their lifestyle choice. In what seems like a heartless world they need something to believe in, to fight for, and if they lose sight of the fact that at the core of their cause is a bunch of overpriced plastic tat then thats exactly what it takes, thats why they are apple fans.

Interestingly, and Jobs knows this, the more they're asked to pay, the more they feel they're getting out of it. If you're expected to buy a new Ipod every year then thats what it takes, its worth it to be part of the apple elite.

Now, with the open source movement you can see a political dimension, and the way its growing in size and what it can offer is undeniable. When you consider the potential that GNU/Linux might have in the future, its not surprising that its advocates are quietly confident and not quite so evangelical, in that rather creepy and spooky Apple way.

Of course the big question is why it is that a site like slashdot even bothers with apple stories. what relevance is a bunch of over-marketed and underpowered toys to nerds?

why should news of a company that makes fisher-price computers and shitty little widgets matter?
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...