backtop


Print 78 comment(s) - last by borismkv.. on Sep 13 at 4:13 PM

Apple strives to keep its iPod lineup fresh with its latest round of updates

Well, it's that time of the year again. September is usually the month when Apple updates its iPod lineup from top to bottom and the boys from Cupertino didn't disappoint with today's announcement which was delivered by none other than Steve Jobs.

Steve Jobs kicked things off today by bragging about the performance of the iTunes App Store and announced iPhone OS 3.1. As DailyTech has reported before, iPhone OS 3.1 adds improved voice control via Bluetooth, better video editing, and faster boot times among other things. The update will be made available today for free to both iPhone and iPod touch owners.

Jobs also announced iTunes 9 which brings a wealth of new features including Home Sharing (allows you to share music, TV shows, movies, audiobook, and apps with up five PCs on a network), Genius Mixes, improved syncing capabilities, a revised iTunes Store appearance, iTunes LP (music, photography, liner notes), and the ability to manage how apps appears on your iPhone or iPod touch directly from the iTunes interface (no more dragging app icons from page to page on your iPhone's touchscreen).

Before revealing the latest generation of iPods, Jobs was more than happy to announce that over 225 million iPods have been sold since its introduction with the iPod touch representing 20 million of that total. Apple is currently sitting at nearly 74% marketshare with its iPod family, while SanDisk is far behind with 7.2%. Microsoft is barely a blip on the screen with just 1.1% marketshare.

Leading up to today's announcement, Apple went on a price slashing spree for its current iPod models as witnessed by the second generation 8GB, 16GB, and 32GB iPod touch models dropping from $229, $299, and $399 respectively to $189, $249, and $279 respectively. The lower pricing makes room for Apple third generation iPod touch lineup.

As expected, the 3G iPod touch lineup comes packing the same processing platform (32GB and 64GB models only) as the recently introduced iPhone 3GS. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that Apple wants the iPod touch to have a camera just yet. The new iPod touch models start at $199 for the 8GB model, then ramp up to $299 for the 32GB model and $399 for the 64GB model – there is no longer a 16GB model in the lineup.

“At just $199 the iPod touch is the most affordable gateway to Apple’s revolutionary App Store with more than 75,000 applications that you can wirelessly download right into your iPod touch,” said Phil Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing. “You get a great iPod, a great pocket computer with the industry’s best mobile web browser and a great game player, all in this super-thin beautiful enclosure.”

The traditional HDD-based iPod Classic got a storage bump to 160GB (from 120GB) and keeps the same $249 price tag.

Apple's iPod nano also got a revamp and is now available in capacities up to 16GB. While the basic design remains unchanged from the previous model, the new iPod nano gains a camera for pictures/video, a microphone, and a speaker for audio playback. And what may be one of the most improbable features added to an iPod (after years of discounting the feature) is the addition of an FM radio tuner on the iPod nano. The 8GB iPod nano is priced at $149 and the 16GB model is priced at $179.

“iPod nano is the world’s most popular music player with over 100 million sold,” said Apple CEO Steve Jobs. “And now we’ve added a video camera to its incredibly thin design, without any additional cost to the user.”

Last year's refresh of the iPod shuffle didn't go over so well with the iPod community. The model's lack of physical controls and featureless design left many puzzled. Apple didn't rectify those issues this time around, but prices are now lower (2GB for $59 and 4GB for $79). The shuffle is also now available in blue, pink, green, silver, and black – there's also a polished steel 4G version for $99.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

**Scratches Head**
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 9/9/2009 2:31:59 PM , Rating: 5
Camera on the Nano, but not the iPod touch?
Apple doubles capacity of iPod touch, but not the nano?

What the heck is going on over there in Cupertino?




RE: **Scratches Head**
By Bender 123 on 9/9/2009 3:07:23 PM , Rating: 1
They have gotten lazy and seem to be seeking a cash fueled munchie treat. Maybe they have taken the environmental thing to a far extreme and now grow their own "plants"...There was a lot of trippy bands in the demo...

I will stick with my Zune 80 and touch 1G until I can get a Pre...It seems that Apple is comfy at the top and lost the innovator edge.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By cubdukat on 9/9/2009 3:38:46 PM , Rating: 5
I'd just be satisfied if they made an iPod Classic that didn't self-destruct if you just look at it funny. I am now on my second (and final) replacement Classic. It's absolutely ridiculous that any piece of hardware costing that much, with that much metal around it, should be that delicate. If it weren't for the fact that even at $280 it's still ridiculously priced for its capacity--and the fact that I hate Microsoft hardware with the heat of a thousand suns--I'd get the Zune HD.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By neothe0ne on 9/9/2009 4:57:49 PM , Rating: 4
I'm sorry but I can't agree with you. I traded in my breaking-down 30gb Creative Zen Vision:M for the 80gb black iPod Classic back in the day, and even though I've dropped it in the parking lot several times, stepped on it several times, and done a complete reformat because someone unplugged me from a school Mac OSX before I safely removed, my iPod Classic still works flawlessly.

But that 16gb iPod Nano looks very tempting now, so if I just adjust my playlists, I'd honestly be happy to switch to it..


RE: **Scratches Head**
By afkrotch on 9/9/2009 10:15:50 PM , Rating: 2
My 8gb Creative Zen X-fi works like a dream. It also sounds a hell of a lot better than any of the iPods or Zunes. I have an mp3 player for music and that's the features that matter to me.

Throw in all these extra apps that you want, but if the thing sounds like ass, I'm not going to buy it.

I went from an iRiver to an iPod, sold the iPod off. Went from an iRiver to a Zune, cause my iRiver broke after I got water in it from snowboarding. Got sick of the sound on the Zune and lack of equalizer and went with the X-fi.

I'm very happy with the X-fi. I just wish they made something with more than 32 gb of storage. I currently have my 8gb X-fi, 8gb Zune, and 120gb Zune (upgraded from 80gb). Will probably replace the 120gb with an Archos, as I was mostly using it for videos and picture viewing. I'd listen to mp3s when the battery on the 8gb dies out during a long flight.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By wired00 on 9/10/2009 1:53:37 AM , Rating: 4
I take your dropped 80gb classic and raise you with my 60GB Toshiba gigabeat i found on the road looking like it had been run over a few times ... bought a $2 charger + transfer cable from ye 'ol ebay and BAM perfectly working gigabeat :)


RE: **Scratches Head**
By borismkv on 9/13/2009 4:13:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
done a complete reformat because someone unplugged me from a school Mac OSX before I safely removed, my iPod Classic still works flawlessly.


I wouldn't call data corruption from unplugging flawless operation.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By nafhan on 9/9/2009 3:13:30 PM , Rating: 5
They're trying to keep the iPods from taking sales away from the iPhone, because MP3 players don't give them a guaranteed monthly revenue stream.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By Ralos on 9/9/2009 5:44:50 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry but... is the iPhone getting them a guaranteed monthly revenue stream?

Don't the phone service providers only have to pay the difference in the initial price of the phone? Like, the customers must take a 3 years plan, but they absorb a part of the phone's cost in selling them at 199$ instead of 599$ or something?

Or do they must pay a monthly "royalty" for 3 years to Apple for every iPhone sold in addition to that?


RE: **Scratches Head**
By Johnmcl7 on 9/9/2009 7:34:53 PM , Rating: 2
As far as I'm aware in the UK at least Apple take a portion of the monthly line rental paid to O2 for the Iphone.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By Totally on 9/9/2009 10:14:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Don't the phone service providers only have to pay the difference in the initial price of the phone?


How does that affect Apple? The consumer pays what the carriers don't immediately absorb which they'll collect later. Besides the point what does that have to do with his comment?

quote:
Or do they must pay a monthly "royalty" for 3 years to Apple for every iPhone sold in addition to that?


uh...yeah


RE: **Scratches Head**
By monomer on 9/9/2009 3:29:16 PM , Rating: 4
The big question is, did the iPod Touch get a compass? I'm pretty sure that's what all of the iPod customers have been clamoring for.

I gots to have me my compass.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By quiksilvr on 9/9/2009 6:50:07 PM , Rating: 2
The pricing scheme here is very strange. $149 for 8GB Nano and $179 for 16 GB? I mean, why not just spend the 30 bucks more? I bet you money that over 90% of Nano sales will be for the 16 GB version.

Furthermore, 8GB for $199 and 32GB for $299? Why not 16, 32, 64? I am really confused.

Even more confusion, look at the Nano lineup at their site. Why is the green one smaller?


RE: **Scratches Head**
By neothe0ne on 9/9/2009 11:09:17 PM , Rating: 2
The green Nano pictured at time of your post is last gen's. The new 5th gen green Nano is a much darker green. You see this if you try to order the green Nano online.

Chalk me up as +1 to the 16gb Nano > 8gb Nano sales.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By afkrotch on 9/10/2009 1:40:09 AM , Rating: 3
It's possible it has something to do with chip memory sizes. Maybe certain configurations require more chips, than others, thus a higher price. Like maybe most companies are just producing 16 gig chips now and 8 gig ones have to be special ordered.

I'm just speculating here, so don't take my word for it.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By jay401 on 9/9/2009 3:45:19 PM , Rating: 4
I am so thankful they didn't shove a camera into the touch.

That means for now it maintains its ability to be taken into government buildings and court houses (unlike devices with cameras in them).

Also, just about every cellphone on the market comes with a camera in it, so just use that, given you'll theoretically always have your cellphone with you anytime you'd have your portable media device.

A camera in the touch would be superfluous at best. Besides, if you want to take better pictures on-the-go and your DSLR is too much to bring with you (or you don't want to invest that much into a camera), you'd bring your Canon/other point-n-shoot compact camera like I do when sight-seeing.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 9/9/2009 4:56:16 PM , Rating: 5
But it doesn't make sense. The most capable iPod in the range gets nothing, while the middle child nano gets a camera and FM radio.

If anything, it would further unify the app base with the iPhone as there are numerous applicationss in the App Store that use the camera that work on the iPhone, but are useless on the iPod touch.

And another thing, Apple gave the nano a camera, but didn't increase the storage capacity at all. What good is giving the nano a camera if there isn't a boost in capacity to take advantage of the video recording capabilities? The touch makes the perfect candidate for the camera with its plentiful storage -- especially at the 64GB mark.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By The0ne on 9/9/2009 4:25:13 PM , Rating: 2
Apple is doing the Nintendo. Blizzard is soon to follow in the software side. There are too many uninformed consumers not to won't you agree?


RE: **Scratches Head**
By BlendMe on 9/9/2009 6:42:32 PM , Rating: 2
Did anyone notice the awkward placement of the camera on the nano? It looks like most of the time you'll be filming your finger.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By neothe0ne on 9/9/2009 11:14:48 PM , Rating: 2
How so? Look at http://www.apple.com/ipodnano/gallery/#image5 - the camera is at the top corner so I fail to see how you can hold your Nano horizontally or vertically in such a way that you'd cover the video cam.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By neothe0ne on 9/10/2009 12:36:32 AM , Rating: 2
Oh crap, I think I was wrong. After looking at http://www.apple.com/ipodnano/gallery/#image4 - I hope that's not actually true. That is a horrible place for the camera.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By 9nails on 9/10/2009 1:17:44 AM , Rating: 3
Furthermore, it shows pictures and video of them using the camera in a manor that would block the lens. False ad's with simulated video in the Nano? I think so - it's unfortunate that they would deliberately mislead the consumer.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By afkrotch on 9/10/2009 1:47:01 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
it's unfortunate that they would deliberately mislead the consumer.


Is that something new for Apple to do?


RE: **Scratches Head**
By AstroCreep on 9/9/2009 8:42:11 PM , Rating: 3
Chemo makes you crazy.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By scrapsma54 on 9/9/2009 9:34:58 PM , Rating: 2
Well its apple, they like to not include features on both products so you have to go out and buy another one that you don't even need.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By tokjoe on 9/10/2009 1:05:20 AM , Rating: 3
They missed the market data on this iPod update. No camera and no GPS/compass for the Touch? Wow, move along, nothing to see in this year's iPod update. My old nano just got another year of life.


RE: **Scratches Head**
By MattDamon on 9/10/2009 2:57:35 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed, i dont see there logic in this....im sorry, but Apple is useless and a waist of time. Its a status thing, thats all.


No Camera
By Pippy on 9/9/2009 2:32:49 PM , Rating: 3
WTF, just WTF. The entire fucking planet was expecting a camera and mic built in. So much for a VoIP phone... and no 16GB model, just WTF. Sorry Apple's not getting my money.




RE: No Camera
By RjBass on 9/9/2009 2:44:38 PM , Rating: 2
I have been saying that for a long time now, and finally got a Zune a few months ago. I'm glad i did too as I love the Zune and never use my old iPod anymore. Heck my kids didn't even want the old iPod, so I gave it away to my mother. She used it when running for about a month, and then bought a Zune lol. I have no idea where it is now, nor do I really care.


RE: No Camera
By Tony Swash on 9/9/2009 3:46:05 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I have been saying that for a long time now, and finally got a Zune a few months ago. I'm glad i did too as I love the Zune and never use my old iPod anymore. Heck my kids didn't even want the old iPod, so I gave it away to my mother. She used it when running for about a month, and then bought a Zune lol. I have no idea where it is now, nor do I really care.


I guess that means that your family now represents approximately 10% of total Zune sales.


RE: No Camera
By RjBass on 9/9/2009 9:42:51 PM , Rating: 2
lol, no probably more like 15%.

The only hold out is my sister and her husband who loves their iPod and Mac computers. I have tried to make them listen to reason but they just aren't having it. Can't really say I blame them though, even though my household is a Windows household, I still really like the look and feel of OS X.


RE: No Camera
By MrDiSante on 9/9/2009 2:49:32 PM , Rating: 1
Sorta weird... I mean given all the sabre-rattling that Microsoft's been doing since June and that there have been reputable leaks since March, I thought they would have come up with something better. At least maybe adding a camera into the iTouch so it has a checkbox that the Zune doesn't.


RE: No Camera
By Mitch101 on 9/9/2009 3:20:38 PM , Rating: 2
From what has been floating around there is a very high failure rate on the camera parts. Will be interesting to see if it paper launches. So far the refresh seems lame.

I think I'm going to get a Zune HD my car radio is FM and would be cool to get HD radio just by plugging in the new Zune.


RE: No Camera
By neothe0ne on 9/9/2009 11:17:31 PM , Rating: 2
Source(s) on the failure rate of the Nano's camera parts? In any case, I ordered a 16gb earlier today and Apple sent me a tracking number already.


RE: No Camera
By Mitch101 on 9/10/2009 9:04:35 AM , Rating: 2
This isnt the original source I read but just as good.

Just days before Apple is expected to unveil its new line of iPods, multiple reports are suggesting that some of the widely anticipated camera-equipped media players could be delayed due to technical difficulties. [Updated with info from Hardmac.]

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/09/07/tech...


RE: No Camera
By jay401 on 9/9/2009 3:48:02 PM , Rating: 1
Yes, shove a crappy camera onto the touch so it can no longer be brought into government facilities or courthouses (think about jury duty, for example), and add zero actual benefit considering the cameraphone in your pocket already has a crappy camera and can do whatever you want a camera on your touch to do. Stupid idea. And thankfully not everyone wanted or expected it, including Apple.


RE: No Camera
By DLeRium on 9/9/2009 4:54:18 PM , Rating: 2
Just because the cameras they sell in the US for cameraphones suck balls doesn't mean much ok?

Apple's cameraphones are behind technology. It's good for a 3MP camera but I could've gotten one in 2006 with the SE K790/K800.

But big deal. Over 2 years ago we had flagship 5MP phones like the N95. Those pictures are amazing.

Today's 8MP N86 and C905 or the 12MP Pixon 12 are really even more amazing. So maybe if they shoved a decent camera in the iPod touch it's not a bad idea.

The reason Apple didn't do it is for other reasons, but who cares? Cameras are cheap and for them to integrate it is no biggie.


RE: No Camera
By afkrotch on 9/10/2009 1:53:17 AM , Rating: 2
Good god, you thought those cameras in those phones were good? Guess you never owned a good or decent camera then.


RE: No Camera
By Aloonatic on 9/9/2009 4:58:08 PM , Rating: 2
Have you guys seen all the "augmented reality" stuff on TV? It does seem pretty handy.

When you link a camera, with GPS & Compass with the addition of 3G internet there are some pretty useful applications to be had.


RE: No Camera
By PrinceGaz on 9/10/2009 3:10:37 PM , Rating: 2
Augmented Reality is all very well, but if you added a camera, GPS & compass, plus critically the 3G internet capability to the iPod touch, you've just turned it into the iPhone :p


Top Stories
By monomer on 9/9/2009 2:57:58 PM , Rating: 2
Just wondering what constitutes a top story around here.

Apple releases a couple minor changes to the iPod lineup, and the story gets binned as a Top Story, while the biggest CPU release since the Phenom II happened yesterday, and its relegated to the regular story pile, and is already well on its way off of the front page.

I'm not really complaining here, but it just seems a little random sometimes, especially considering that every new camera preview gets listed as a top story as well.




RE: Top Stories
By TomZ on 9/9/2009 3:16:23 PM , Rating: 2
I also thought it strange that the CPU release kind of got sidelined here. Anand had a 20-page article on it.


RE: Top Stories
By PrinceGaz on 9/9/2009 4:37:02 PM , Rating: 2
I expect there will be a baig (or not so big as it happens) article on the new Apple range soon. Disappointing for iTouch owners hoping for a major upgrade, all you get is a slightly faster processor (note that they said 50% faster rather than double, because the iTouch 2G was already somewhat faster than the iPhone so having the same hardware as the 3GS makes less of a difference), and more RAM. More RAM will definitely help those who jailbreak and multi-task. More storage is pretty much irrelevant unless you want to carry loads of videos and music on it (which is what the iPod Classic is intended for).

iPhone (412MHz) x2 = 824
iTouch 2G (533MHz) x1.5 = 800

The CPU upgrade of the 3GS makes a lot less difference compared to the iTouch 2G than it did with the previous iPhone models. The GPU upgrade is still very good however, but tbh, is irrelevant for most uses as the GPU in the old iPhone and iTouch was more than powerful enough for the sort of apps and games it is intended for.

I am uncertain from the announcement whether the iTouch 3G has an in-built mic or whether they are supplying a headset with a mic (which can be bought as an optional extra for the iTouch 2G). It sounds like they are simply including a headset with mic, not that the device (32GB and 64GB models) have an in-built mic.


RE: Top Stories
By TomZ on 9/9/2009 5:25:33 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe you misunderstood, but the CPU release yesterday we were talking about was the Intel Core i5/i7.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...


RE: Top Stories
By PrinceGaz on 9/10/2009 2:30:24 AM , Rating: 2
I read the the AT article about Lynnfield and its advantages and disadvantages compared to the Bloomfield design, most notably the improved power-managament in Lynnfield, though also the much reduced stock-voltage overclocking because of the integrated PCIe bit in it which needs a bit more juice (and therefore a better HSF) when cranking things up, and for those who are bothered, the limited PCIe performance because there are only 16 PCIe 2.0 lanes which have to be split in SLI or CF.

I was well aware about that article and I read it from virtual cover to cover, but that doesn't mean there won't be one about Apple's new products today (though there aren't really any new products to mention).


RE: Top Stories
By lightfoot on 9/9/2009 3:28:03 PM , Rating: 5
But this is Apple...


RE: Top Stories
By RjBass on 9/9/2009 3:47:40 PM , Rating: 2
lol I wish I could give you rep points, but I already posted here.


New Nano
By BigToque on 9/9/2009 2:26:29 PM , Rating: 3
I really wish they had bumped the nano's capacity to 32gb.

The FM tuner is pretty cool.




RE: New Nano
By mfed3 on 9/9/2009 2:31:02 PM , Rating: 2
zune hd has hd radio and fm :)


RE: New Nano
By TomZ on 9/9/2009 3:25:47 PM , Rating: 2
...and 32GB!


RE: New Nano
By Tony Swash on 9/9/2009 7:28:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
...and 32GB!


... and you get to be a member of a really exclusive consumer group!


RE: New Nano
By TomZ on 9/9/2009 9:28:03 PM , Rating: 2
I think Zune has a 10% market share in the US, right?


RE: New Nano
By Shadowself on 9/9/2009 2:31:02 PM , Rating: 3
Yes, a 32 GB nano with an FM tuner, voice recorder and a video camera might have tempted me. As it is, even with everything else included, 16 GB just holds too small a fraction of my collection to be useful without having to keep changing the loaded set (and I'd bet a significant fraction of that 16 GB is used up by that video camera and sound every time you use it).


RE: New Nano
By Noliving on 9/9/2009 7:03:34 PM , Rating: 2
the FM turner isn't pretty cool, in fact it is sad that it took Apple this lone to include an FM turner in any of the ipod classics or nano's. I mean for crying out loud for the past 3 years FM turners have pretty much been the standard feature in an mp3 player. I mean all zunes have had FM turners in them since release.


iTunes9
By damianrobertjones on 9/9/2009 3:34:01 PM , Rating: 3
iTunes9

More or less services?
More or less startup items?
Quicktime or no quicktime install with v9?




RE: iTunes9
By jay401 on 9/9/2009 3:49:13 PM , Rating: 4
It's iTunes, so you can bet it's still bloatware. But at least it's increasingly functional bloatware. ;)


RE: iTunes9
By kmmatney on 9/9/2009 8:36:10 PM , Rating: 2
iTunes isn't too bad if you extract the install files, and only install itunes and not the crappy services.


RE: iTunes9
By neothe0ne on 9/9/2009 11:22:28 PM , Rating: 2
According to my completely baseless tests, iTunes 8 had a launch memory footprint of 67mb whereas iTunes 9 has a launch memory footprint of 110mb. However, iTunes 9 feels snappier and more responsive than iTunes 8 so I can honestly say I think Apple did a good thing here. (The new sync options are also very nice: in iTunes 8 you could selectively choose what playlists went onto your player, but now in iTunes 9 you can now limit the music synced to specific Album Artists, instead of creating autoplaylists for them)


RE: iTunes9
By afkrotch on 9/10/2009 2:01:40 AM , Rating: 2
But my Winamp 5 Lite uses like 4mb and my mp3 player is drag and drop. Screw crap software like iTunes.


RE: iTunes9
By Narbo on 9/10/2009 1:24:33 PM , Rating: 2
I have to agree. I was playing around with it this morning and it appears that the memory footprint is higher however the application itself is much faster and less cpu intensive.

For example on my MBP playing a mp3 in Quicktime was taking 10% of 1 core, in iTunes with the gui and all it was < 3%.

I also noticed the GUI seems to be quite a bit more responsive to user input. It looks like they got rid of a lot of blocking stuff and are doing things in a more asynchronous manner.


Short-Lived
By clovell on 9/9/2009 4:02:32 PM , Rating: 2
What's gonna suck is that with Zune & XBL launching a major update within the next week, the new iTunes revision will only breifly hold the spotlight.




RE: Short-Lived
By TomZ on 9/9/2009 4:15:35 PM , Rating: 1
So what...?


RE: Short-Lived
By Pirks on 9/9/2009 4:27:57 PM , Rating: 1
So Apple won't survive the recession dumbo!

/sarcasm

:P :o)


RE: Short-Lived
By TomZ on 9/9/2009 5:30:08 PM , Rating: 1
Wow, clever reply.


RE: Short-Lived
By clovell on 9/9/2009 4:34:28 PM , Rating: 2
Just observing that the shoe is on the other foot now.


160gb is Old News!
By TheMan876 on 9/10/2009 1:18:10 AM , Rating: 3
Doesn't anyone remember that Apple already had a 160gb ipod classic!? I recently sold mine to buy a Zune 120gb which is currently full.

I really wish someone (Apple or MS) would through a harddrive into one of these snappy touch screen devices for those of us who don't demand that the device be as thin as paper!




RE: 160gb is Old News!
By plewis00 on 9/10/2009 3:02:13 AM , Rating: 2
The old 160GB classic had a dual-platter 1.8" HDD not a single platter.

They don't release a hard-disk based touch device because all that snappiness would dissolve - remember the old days when your hard disk spun up and it would freeze the OS for a couple of seconds - that just wouldn't go down well on an iPod Touch...


RE: 160gb is Old News!
By Narbo on 9/10/2009 1:28:16 PM , Rating: 2
Meh, no point in hard drives anymore with flash up to 64GB+. Reliabiity, heat, power consumption, packaging constraints all huge negatives when compared to flash.

Give it 1-2 years tops and flash capacity for consumer devices will be up to 256GB+ anyhow.


Apple Production
By hiscross on 9/9/2009 7:55:05 PM , Rating: 1
I know that the number of post on this site are anti-Apple. How those people feel about Apple is not my concern. If you take the time to watch this video you'll see how much care Apple puts into their products, especially their hardware. I've only seen this care on Sun boxes and a few SGI's I once worked on and a NeXT slab I once owned.

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/

Who is John Galt? Steve Jobs.




RE: Apple Production
By afkrotch on 9/10/2009 2:07:48 AM , Rating: 2
Yep, lots of care went into buying mediocre hardware. The only work they do is to make it nice and shiny. Everything inside is cheap to okay.


RE: Apple Production
By rameshms on 9/10/2009 4:28:00 PM , Rating: 2
I just watched the video about battery in the site.. I found it mostly marketing BS.. If you really want to know the story, i recommend you watch this video.. http://www.storyofstuff.com/

Apple makes hardware that forces buyers to upgrade after few years. Especially non-removable battery is ridiculous. Everytime I take my computer to my country in Asia (hot+humid env), the battery capacity drops by 20-50%.


iPhone OS 3.1
By IceBreakerG on 9/9/2009 2:56:35 PM , Rating: 2
I'll upgrade when it's been jail broken. I hope the dev team has something coming soon.




RE: iPhone OS 3.1
By Narbo on 9/10/2009 1:32:45 PM , Rating: 2
It's pretty much a given there will be jailbreak.

Only reasons not to upgrade would be:
- You need a full unlock (3.1 upgrades baseband which is always iffy)
- You absolutely must keep your cydia/non Apple apps etc...

Other then that I would go for it. Been playing with it and initial impressions is that they have significantly improved the responsiveness of the rendering engine in Safari while loading pages (oooo "snappier safari hah! ;)) among other things. Baseband looks to be more solid too, getting seemingly better signal performance in my office but it could just be the weather which is very clear today.


Zune HD
By TheRequiem on 9/9/2009 2:33:08 PM , Rating: 3
I've been waiting for this. Now I know for sure that the Zune HD is the one I will purchase.




1.1% market share for zune?
By Noliving on 9/9/2009 7:01:20 PM , Rating: 2
To be fair unlike the ipod the zune is only sold in canada and US. The Zune has a 10% market share in the US, can't say for canada though.




Why would anyone buy a shuffle?
By Johnmcl7 on 9/9/2009 7:40:28 PM , Rating: 2
Given Sandisk have a new clip on the way with expandable memory and longer batterylife I'd have thought Apple would be making more of an effort with the Shuffle although I guess Apple can get away with it.




Free update?
By 9nails on 9/10/2009 1:06:55 AM , Rating: 2
I don't think you worded that one correctly. The "free" update isn't available to iPod Touch 2.x or previous users. They first must purchase the upgrade to 3.0, and then can get the free update.




By LMSKILLS on 9/12/2009 2:11:48 PM , Rating: 2
They really should have added the camera to the iPod Touch and doubled the capacity of the iPod Nano.




"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki