# iPod Video Thread - (speculation, rumours etc.)



## Ceroc Addict (Jul 15, 2005)

I remember when Sony owned the portable music player market and then got king hit by Apple that delivered, with the iPod, what Sony wouldn't/couldn't at the time.

Now it looks to me like history is getting ready to repeat itself. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but soon, given Apple's stubborn refusal to come out with a video iPod (and a number of solid contenders either being released or already out):

Cowon X5

Creative Zen Vision

Epson P2000



Kap


----------



## HomunQlus (Jul 15, 2005)

I'd buy the Zen Vision, looks pretty close to an iPod I'd say, only in landscape format


----------



## cfleck (Jul 15, 2005)

Not again.  Can we consolidate all the video iPod threads?


----------



## fryke (Jul 15, 2005)

Well, none of them has a USP it seems to me - apart from a small video-capable screen.

It seems to me that in order to succeed (i.e. to kill the iPod), such a device would need at least two of the three (better all three) following points:

1.) *Screen large and bright enough, as well as good battery life and low overall weight* to actually view whole movies on (3 hours plus).

2.) *User Interface*, by which I mean it has to cover audio and video from the bought disk (CD, DVD etc.) to the portable pleasure (including computer). I.e.: I want to buy a disk (CD/DVD), put it into my computer (it gets scanned to the Library of a jukebox like software) and synch it to my portable device, where I can view it. If I start to listen to an audiobook or movie, both synched devices know where I left off.

3.) *Accompanying online store*... The same software lets me buy tracks, be they audio only or audio and video. The store should let me buy a movie at a quality that's good enough for a TV set or a video beamer. It has to be scalable, i.e. the same file does well on the small screen (without reading the whole 800 MB file, perhaps?) as well as on the HDTV beamer or TV set.

I guess technology just isn't ready for that yet. Apple does good to wait, in my opinion. I don't want the iPod to deliver sub-par video, for example. Imagine you'd buy "Fantastic Four" on the iTunes Video Store in a couple of weeks. You'd pay, say, 20 USD. You'd get a 800 MB H.264 file. Viewable on a video iPod's small screen (320p width? or 640p? actual 720p?) as well as an attached display in HDTV res. Download takes quite a while, right? Now, a year later the iTunes Video Store lets you download the same movie in a higher quality as a 500 MB file. Good? Sure. But all the people who're p***ed off? I guess Apple has a target. They want to be able to deliver a certain quality at a certain size for a certain device for a certain amount of time. That time isn't ready yet - and the list of devices you've mentioned will be a JOKE compared to what Apple wants.


----------



## fryke (Jul 15, 2005)

cfleck: Those threads are old. Merging them now would, in my opinion, confuse users who read the old stuff first.

If, however, new threads appear _now_, I'll merge them with this one.


----------



## HomunQlus (Jul 15, 2005)

fryke said:
			
		

> Well, none of them has a USP it seems to me - apart from a small video-capable screen.
> 
> It seems to me that in order to succeed (i.e. to kill the iPod), such a device would need at least two of the three (better all three) following points:
> 
> ...





The Zen Vision meets your first two requirements.

http://www.dapreview.net/news.php?extend.1784


----------



## fjdouse (Jul 15, 2005)

..and the third requirement is unimportant for some.  Never used itms, never intend to either.  I can buy my music from an online store in mp3 and put it on any device I like.

I love the shuffle I've been using, but it's my partner's iPod.  I've just bought my own media player which does video too and I'm quite capable of backing up my DVDs into a tiny divx to watch on the go. (and I can record TV... and take photos)


----------



## Shookster (Jul 15, 2005)

fjdouse said:
			
		

> ..and the third requirement is unimportant for some. Never used itms, never intend to either. I can buy my music from an online store in mp3 and put it on any device I like.



Fryke was saying that no matter who offers the download service, they'd lack the necessary technology to make it viable for a mass-market audience. That doesn't just apply to ITMS.


----------



## mindbend (Jul 15, 2005)

Wow, a 4" screen! Call all your friends to gather around and watch this year's superbowl.

And just where does one go for content? And is it as easy to obtain as ITMS? And is it a fun, seamless integration into the computer experience or just a hacked on connection?

And, once again, who the hell cares about a 4" screen? I guess I have to concede there is in fact an audience for such a thing (although the jury's still out on that), but I sure hope Apple doesn't lower themselves to producing such a piece of junk. Yes, I'm sure all the examples here work just fine, but it's still just a semi-useless devie as far as video is concerned. You'll never see a 4" video screen from Apple, thank you very much.

I mean, really, is there one single person here that is thinking, man I can't wait to watch some 4" video? Maybe it's just me.

Actually, in all seriousness, I could see having something like that, even as small as it is, to give to my kids in the back seat to shut them up (nah, I'd go with a PSP instead). Other than that, complete junk.


----------



## sirstaunch (Jul 15, 2005)

Ceroc Addict said:
			
		

> I remember when Sony owned the portable music player market and then got king hit by Apple that delivered, with the iPod, what Sony wouldn't/couldn't at the time.
> 
> Now it looks to me like history is getting ready to repeat itself. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but soon, given Apple's stubborn refusal to come out with a video iPod (and a number of solid contenders either being released or already out):
> 
> ...



There's this one, http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=98410&item=5788879185&rd=1 

friend just bought it, let ya know of it's performance

$499.99 Aussie Dollar = $375 US Dollars, suspiciously cheap 



Oh no, the epson is $499, not to bad i guess in price wise


----------



## Ceroc Addict (Jul 15, 2005)

fryke said:
			
		

> Well, none of them has a USP it seems to me - apart from a small video-capable screen.


USP?



			
				fryke said:
			
		

> It seems to me that in order to succeed (i.e. to kill the iPod), such a device would need at least two of the three (better all three) following points:
> 
> 1.) *Screen large and bright enough, as well as good battery life and low overall weight* to actually view whole movies on (3 hours plus).


I think that's actually 3 separate points , but I generally agree. I'd modify these to be:

a. Able to see video clearly (this is a function of the screen quality, 
    resolution, frame rate, etc)

b. _User swappable_ battery. The technology simply isn't ready to have video
    and great battery life at the same time. I'll settle for being able to carry
    around a couple of spare charged batteries.

c. Easily pocketable. I think the iPod mini is the perfect example of this
    (the regular iPod is just on the acceptable upper limit)



			
				fryke said:
			
		

> 2.) *User Interface*, by which I mean it has to cover audio and video from the bought disk (CD, DVD etc.) to the portable pleasure (including computer). I.e.: I want to buy a disk (CD/DVD), put it into my computer (it gets scanned to the Library of a jukebox like software) and synch it to my portable device, where I can view it. If I start to listen to an audiobook or movie, both synched devices know where I left off.


I agree, but this isn't even a function of the player/software, it's a function of the extent to which DVD manufacturers, etc. make it tedious to do via 
consumer hostile copy protection measures.



			
				fryke said:
			
		

> 3.) *Accompanying online store*...


This is actually the source of my frustration - because of it's iPod/iTMS successes (and it emphasis on video with the Mac), only Apple is in a real position to move portable video forward. If Apple backed online video, the way they're currently backing podcasting, it'd provide a huge stimulus to both the content creators and consumer portable video market.



			
				fryke said:
			
		

> I don't want the iPod to deliver sub-par video, for example. Imagine you'd buy "Fantastic Four" on the iTunes Video Store in a couple of weeks. You'd pay, say, 20 USD. You'd get a 800 MB H.264 file. Viewable on a video iPod's small screen (320p width? or 640p? actual 720p?) as well as an attached display in HDTV res. Download takes quite a while, right? Now, a year later the iTunes Video Store lets you download the same movie in a higher quality as a 500 MB file. Good? Sure. But all the people who're p***ed off? I guess Apple has a target. They want to be able to deliver a certain quality at a certain size for a certain device for a certain amount of time. That time isn't ready yet - and the list of devices you've mentioned will be a JOKE compared to what Apple wants.


I think this logic is flawed for three reasons:

1. All devices have an "early adopter" stage. No company get's it perfect
    on the first try - remember the first iPod? (no clickwheel, no iTMS, no
    support for Audible books on Windows, no support for USB, no dock
    connector, etc). As long as they're committed to the product line,
    they'll be able to get it "perfect" over a few years. The other companies 
    that I mentioned earlier in the thread have at least shown that it's 
    possible to release a decent portable video player with today's 
    technology.

2. I don't think the market for portable video has anything to do with 
    watching movies. All the naysayers come out to say "_I wouldn't want to
    watch a movie on a screen that small_". Well, duh. I can't even imagine
    wanting to download a file of several hundred MB to watch on a 2 - 4" 
    screen. (I've already listed the numerous uses I'd actually have for a 
    video iPod somewhere on [post=332437]another thread[/post]).

3. I think the _device _needs to come out first, then the online video store. 
    Of course Apple can guarantee the quality of video played - others have
    already done so (with the only compromise being a user swappable 
    battery). The files may be big (so big that for a couple of years 
    people will choose to just transfer video from DVDs, etc), but so what?

Kap


----------



## mw84 (Jul 16, 2005)

There's also a new Ipod shuffle alternative, the IRiver 'Domino', a bit more expensive and a lot more ugly. It does have a built in mic, clock and allows you to see what track your playing though.


----------



## MacFreak (Jul 18, 2005)

I am hoping it's true but will we are able to download movie than music video?


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Jul 18, 2005)

Nobody but Apple knows -- it'd be pure speculation to say one way or the other.


----------



## Quicksilver (Jul 18, 2005)

It would be silly to say no. eventually the iPod or at least Apple will venture into this market. The question is when. In the mean time you could call it speculation.


----------



## Canada-Man (Jul 18, 2005)

From an article I read today in Montreal's La Presse they say we might be able to buy tv shows and watch them on the "iPod Video" if such a thing ever exists.


----------



## fryke (Jul 19, 2005)

Too many threads about this already.


----------



## RGrphc2 (Jul 19, 2005)

Taken from Om Malik's Blog and Slashdot :

Slashdot:


> Chris Holland writes "Beyond the WSJ Story, Om Malik gives us inside information obtained by Business 2.0 Magazine about the Apple Video iPod. 'Steve Jobs has spoken with Disney President and soon-to-be CEO Bob Iger about ways to license various Disney content for a video iPod, according to an internal Disney email I have obtained. That could include anything from clips from ESPN and ABC News to short cartoons.' "




Malik's Blog


> It has been one of those urban myths, that is actually true. Despite fervent denials by Steve Jobs (nobody will take him for his word!) Apple is working on a video iPod, as per the WSJ. My Business 2.0 colleague, Paul Sloan had the complete lowdown, and had been working on this scoop ever since he wrote the big piece pondering what next for Apple, in the April 2005 issue of the magazine. WSJ hints that the video iPod is all about music videos, Sloan has more gory and exclusive details than just that.



Images:






i want one...   have no practical use for one but still...


----------



## Stridder44 (Jul 19, 2005)

I believe that it is true!


And I also believe that those images are fake, and ugly.


I think that they'll make a PDA type thing though. Unless it has in amazing battery life or something revolutionary about it, a simple device that only plays movies seems kind of a waste...


----------



## fryke (Jul 19, 2005)

*sigh*... You guys really don't make it easy on moderators...  What shall we do? Stick this thread and change its title to "iPod Video anytime soon?" ... Or remove it completely, close it like the other one or merge them all together to some unreadable mix of completely different angles on the always-the-same subject?


----------



## kainjow (Jul 19, 2005)

Why don't you just make a whole new category on the forum for iPod Video discussions


----------



## mindbend (Jul 19, 2005)

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050714.html


----------



## fryke (Jul 19, 2005)

Oh, well, Cringely. He babbles every few weeks, I think...


----------



## fjdouse (Jul 19, 2005)

fryke said:
			
		

> Oh, well, Cringely. He babbles every few weeks, I think...


I'm with you, every time I see his rambling, I just switch off.

Fryke can't you create a group/section in the Rumours area for PDA/Video iPod stuff?


----------



## fryke (Jul 19, 2005)

I personally can't, but we (mod-team/admins) have been discussing a special iPod forum in the past. The outcome so far was that we had enough forums to take care of the iPod threads. That might change in the future, but all the iPod Video rumour-threads, of course, don't make for a good excuse to 'invent' an iPod forum on macosx.com. (Rather, they're a mod-issue...)
I guess I'll go with sticking the thread and renaming it. Should new threads appear on the subject, I'll merge those into that.


----------



## pds (Jul 19, 2005)

Personally, I don't want a video iPod per se, even the biggest screen is just too small.

What I _would_ like to see is an iPod that runs Keynote or ()PPoint.  That would be sweet. Plug it into a projector or a large format tv and let it roll. It would have to run QT clips, so it could probably could run movies too - not to be seen on the pod itself, but as a totally personal, totally portable, totally connectable movie player. Just add popcorn.


----------



## fryke (Jul 19, 2005)

If the iPod _has_ a colour screen and _has_ the capability to display the movies on an external screen, it would - of course - be very dumb not to let people view the movies on the small screen, too.
But I agree in that the possibility to attach an external display/beamer is key.


----------



## karavite (Jul 21, 2005)

So, should I start working on my VideoPodCasts?


----------



## fryke (Jul 22, 2005)

Why not do that, anyway? iTunes (and other podcast) users might enjoy them, even if they don't work on an iPod.


----------



## Ceroc Addict (Aug 4, 2005)

PC Magazine has a preview of the Creative Zen Vision

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1843921,00.asp

and this thing is _beautiful _- exactly the player I wish Apple had brought out. It even tunes and records FM radio.

At just $100 more than the full sized iPod, I see Apple losing a significant number of sales here (although iPod mini and iPod shuffle sales will still probably go strong).

Kap


----------



## RGrphc2 (Aug 4, 2005)

Ceroc Addict said:
			
		

> PC Magazine has a preview of the Creative Zen Vision
> 
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1843921,00.asp
> 
> ...




Rebel XT or this....damn


----------



## Ceroc Addict (Aug 5, 2005)

RGrphc2 said:
			
		

> Rebel XT or this....damn


For the cost of a Rebel XT, you could almost get the Zen Vision *and* a Canon Powershot S2 IS (i.e. a perfectly good and fun camera)

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_s2is.asp

Kap


----------



## RGrphc2 (Aug 5, 2005)

Ceroc Addict said:
			
		

> For the cost of a Rebel XT, you could almost get the Zen Vision *and* a Canon Powershot S2 IS (i.e. a perfectly good and fun camera)
> 
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_s2is.asp
> 
> Kap



I want a pro digital SLR not a point-n-shoot (already got one of those   )

found a good package deal on one though brand new
http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=E2CNDIGRBL1855


----------



## Timmargh (Sep 7, 2005)

_"Feed your video iPod."_

Click here.


----------



## fryke (Sep 7, 2005)

Interesting.  No proof for the existance of the iPod video, of course, but interesting nonetheless.


----------



## RGrphc2 (Sep 7, 2005)

Could this be a hint to what's coming??  Isn't that Press-Release from Apple coming today?


----------



## kainjow (Sep 7, 2005)

Well, just look at the whois info for cinematology.com:

Administrative Contact:
Word.Net Communications
David Holst (ambigram@*foundhumor.com*)
+1.4178943166
Fax: +1.6034150121
PO Box 14463
Springfield, MO 65814
US

http://www.foundhumor.com/ - "FoundHumor.Com - Funny Stuff Found Worldwide"


----------



## Boru (Oct 12, 2005)

From TUAW ...

http://flickr.com/photos/pedromoreno/51888815/in/set-1125837/


Brian


----------



## Veljo (Oct 12, 2005)

Well today it became a reality


----------



## fryke (Oct 12, 2005)

Wow. That was one big I-told-u-so kind of a moment for me. For years I've been trying to tell people that an iPod video would not necessarily have to be about whole movies. It's a bit like Steve's been listening to me - but I guess at the end of the day it just made sense to more people than just myself. (wipes off a tear...)


----------



## fjdouse (Oct 13, 2005)

I wonder how many people will be choking down humble pie?

"it's never going to happen"  "bla bla bla"

I think it's a tad expensive, it doesn't appeal to me, I'd go for another media player...


----------



## fryke (Oct 13, 2005)

I might even go for it as a music player. Ain't really that expensive, if you look at the older iPods' prices, is it?


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 13, 2005)

fjdouse said:
			
		

> I wonder how many people will be choking down humble pie?
> 
> "it's never going to happen"  "bla bla bla"
> 
> I think it's a tad expensive, it doesn't appeal to me, I'd go for another media player...



a tad expensive??!  it's the _same_ price as the ipod!  it's _cheaper_ than the first ipod! it's cheaper than the ipod photo!

what other media player could you _possibly_ get that would be better?


----------



## gphillipk (Oct 13, 2005)

I wish Apple did something PSP'ish; the present screen size is simply not for watching movie clips. I thought they were pushing the envelope when they expected people to view photos on that screen, let alone movie clips.


----------



## fryke (Oct 13, 2005)

Not all technology is perfect for everyone's needs, of course. I think they're doing good to start 'small'. Let's see how those TV shows sell. Let's see how the iPods sell (I think they're going to be big...). I'm sure Apple will not say "This is the video iPod, we ain't gonna improve that". It'd be stupid to assume that. On the other hand, they probably don't want to offer TV series in several resolutions, ONE resolution is the goal, I guess. So it'll probably stay like this for at least some time.

The other problem is that an iPod with a big wide screen might just not look like an iPod anymore, and might profit less from the iPod's iconic status. We'll see.

Btw.: I wonder why people around the 'net are calling this thing a "wide screen". Wider than the earlier iPod's maybe, but also higher. 4:3 it is, and I think that's definitely going to change with later video iPods.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 13, 2005)

this is *not* an iPod Video.  it is an iPod music player, that got the photo feature so they could bump up to colour screens.  now they have a video feature to show that they aren't behind the curve.  it isn't a video ipod.  it's an ipod that *can* play video. that much must be stressed here.  all the news sites are backing apple in this decision.  video is just not viable yet, as there is just not enough content, realistically.  DVD's take FAR too long to rip with todays technology.


----------



## applewhore (Oct 13, 2005)

Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I just downloaded the music video "American Idiot" to test it out on my PowerBook...  When I tried to play it in "full screen" mode it's awful...

Would it be the same if used it on one of the new iPods with connections to a TV?  I thought this was the whole point?

I certainly don't want to watch a window within a TV screen...  I want to watch a full screen program.

I like the idea but I hate the screen resolution...  Here's hoping that I might be wrong about all this?!?


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Oct 13, 2005)

Fist of all, your monitor and your TV set have DRASTICALLY different resolutions, unless you have an HDTV (and even then there's a big difference).  The size of the screen isn't what's making the video look crappy -- it's the resolution at which you're playing it.  I would suspect that the iTunes videos would look much better on a non-HD TV than they would full-screen on a monitor, even at 800x600.  Your non-HD TV has approximately 525 "lines" of resolution (no matter if it's a 19" TV or a 60" TV), and all of those aren't even used for the picture.  Your monitor, if newer and larger than 15", is probably run at a minimum resolution of 1024x768 if not more.

The video from the iPod will not be super-duper quality on a TV, but it will look many times better than full-screen video on your monitor.

In short, comparing the video quality on a monitor to the video quality on a TV is like comparing how your finger would cut through a steak to how a knife would cut through a steak.  Completely different scope.



			
				Lt Major Burns said:
			
		

> DVD's take FAR too long to rip with todays technology.


Although there is software out there that allows you to rip a DVD to your hard drive, it is still not a completely legal thing to do.  It's a gray area in terms of legality.  Apple simply will not enter a market that is "gray" until there are defined boundaries, either established by them or someone else -- and even if they do enter the market of feature-length video, they will most definitely not mention anything about DVD ripping or copying or use of on the iPod.


----------



## fryke (Oct 13, 2005)

320*240 is more or less VHS, or if that tells you more, VCD quality. It's not good, but it's not _totally_ useless either.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 14, 2005)

ElDiabloConCaca said:
			
		

> Although there is software out there that allows you to rip a DVD to your hard drive, it is still not a completely legal thing to do. It's a gray area in terms of legality. Apple simply will not enter a market that is "gray" until there are defined boundaries, either established by them or someone else -- and even if they do enter the market of feature-length video, they will most definitely not mention anything about DVD ripping or copying or use of on the iPod.


  the legality issue is that of ripping cds. its a copyright issue, and one we went through 5 years ago with cds. the outcome is, that it is completley legal to rip your music to your computer.  it's illegal to do it with someone elses, it's then classed as theft, and is therefore illegal.

the same for dvd's.  if you own them, then they are yours, and you have payed the copyright on them.  what you do with them for your own personal use is then up to you.  you could smear jam on them and stick them to your forehead, if you wanted to.  just don't distribute them beyond the legal bounds.

the problem, i can see, is only the pain in the arse ripping them. it took roughly 5 hours to put a dvd in and be left with a movie file that was usable.  that file was huge.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Oct 14, 2005)

No, that is wrong.  A law that covers audio CDs does not automatically extend to DVDs.  The CD-ripping thing has been through the courts and a ruling has been made on the legality of it.  DVD-ripping has not.

Music is governed and overseen by a completely different group than movies and DVDs are (RIAA vs. MPAA) in the states.

You do not "own" the content on a CD nor a DVD.  You own a license to use the content on the disc in restricted manners, and that's it.  At any point in time your license to use the content can be revoked by certain authorities.

The only thing you physically "own" concerning CDs and DVDs is the actual media that the content is "burned" on.  You do not "own" the content itself.

Just because it's legal to rip a CD does *not* make it legal to rip a DVD.  DVD ripping is still a gray area, not really legal or illegal at the moment.  One of the main points of this is that the DMCA makes it VERY clear that it is 100% illegal to circumvent copy protection of digital media of any kind.  Ripping a commercial DVD that has Macrovision and/or CSS protection is 100% illegal, because you're circumventing the copy protection ("copy" protection means just that: stop people from "copying" the content, whether it's for personal or commercial use).

*Ripping a commercial DVD with any form of copy protection on it in the United States is 100% illegal.*


----------



## applewhore (Oct 15, 2005)

ElDiabloConCaca said:
			
		

> Fist of all, your monitor and your TV set have DRASTICALLY different resolutions, unless you have an HDTV (and even then there's a big difference).  The size of the screen isn't what's making the video look crappy -- it's the resolution at which you're playing it.



Hi Diablo

You're absolutely right - I don't know what I was thinking!  A definite case of engaging keyboard before engaging brain!

Thanks for your reply...  That video iPod's looking more attractive by the minute!


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 15, 2005)

ElDiabloConCaca said:
			
		

> No, that is wrong. A law that covers audio CDs does not automatically extend to DVDs. The CD-ripping thing has been through the courts and a ruling has been made on the legality of it. DVD-ripping has not.
> 
> Music is governed and overseen by a completely different group than movies and DVDs are (RIAA vs. MPAA) in the states.
> 
> ...


dang.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 15, 2005)

ddoes anyone get the feeling the shuffle's days are numbered?  i mean it served a purpose, and has sold a lot, but in the face of the nano (only £60 more expensive)  i think it could suffer.  i personally would be too bothered if it were axed in favour of a super cheap 512mb nano.  a shuffle with a screen.  

it just seems really disjointed now against the other two members of the family, which now look so close-knit.


----------



## CreativeEye (Oct 15, 2005)

i dont think we'll see the end of the shuffle - but its in need of a big price drop.

the shuffle should be the ipod that 'everyone' owns - and then apple can either up-sell - or get people hooked and they will inevitably want to up-grade.

i'd love to see the day when a shuffle is included in a purchase of a mac. i.e. - buy a mac over #999 - 512mb shuffle (and remember its a drive too!) included...

i think its already been mooted - but there could be a third shuffle introduced... The Front Row Shuffle - a 1gb shuffle with IR remote built in... 90 british pounds for a current 1gd - price it at 100 for the F.R.S....


----------



## fryke (Oct 15, 2005)

As long as you can't equip your Mac with a receiver for the remote, I don't really see a big market there. Or do you want to remote control your big iPod with your small iPod? I dunno...


----------



## applewhore (Oct 15, 2005)

parb.johal@ante said:
			
		

> i'd love to see the day when a shuffle is included in a purchase of a mac. i.e. - buy a mac over #999 - 512mb shuffle (and remember its a drive too!) included...


Interesting idea - I can see it happening...

Also, Lt Major, don't forget that the shuffle is pretty much indestructible - while the nano, by all accounts, isn't!  I know which I'd rather take to the gym...


----------



## crcr2003 (Oct 16, 2005)

hi!

I guess everyone now wants to download music videos to watch them on the iPod video, iTunes and also on Front Row . Anyway in my case i m downloading them from Yahoo -just google "download 700k quality videos from yahoo for mac" and then i convert them from .wmv to .mov using Flip4mac to watch them on the iPod Video and iTunes/FrontRow. It works but the problem is that flip4mac plays only half the video on Itunes on the trial version : ( Any free program to convert? or there is a way to convert the .wmv yahoo music videos to itunes .mov videos inside the mac???? 

my powerbook costed me almost $2500, i m already broken to keep buying stuff... 

ps. My advice if u would like to download videos from yahoo would be: 1. get ASFRecoderX 0.4 ( to download the video ) and 2. Lyfox - fernyb.2ya.com - (to find and watch the Yahoo music video that u wanna have, as well as to obtain the information of the "mms" of the yahoo video that you will put on ASFRecorderX to download the music video). This way does the job much better than if you do it with Videolan. 

i hope you find this tip useful but tell me how to convert them for free!! Flip4mac does the job but i m sure theres a better way.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 16, 2005)

I was once relaxing in a steaming hot bath, really getting into a very good book, peaceful and relaxed listening something soothing (possibly mogwai), and nothing to bother me, except that i then felt somthing tickle the underside of my thigh...  with both hands on my book i was releuctant to find out what this was, and maybe it would go away.  in the end i itched it.

it turned out that the thing tickling my leg as it swam past was this

it's fine.


----------



## chevy (Oct 16, 2005)

fryke said:
			
		

> As long as you can't equip your Mac with a receiver for the remote, I don't really see a big market there. Or do you want to remote control your big iPod with your small iPod? I dunno...



An Universal Doc would do it.


----------



## fryke (Oct 16, 2005)

The universal Dock lets you control the Mac?! Where does it say that? If you meant that you can control an iPod with a universal dock and a remote, you misread my post, because I knew that, only I found it a funny idea to control a big iPod with a small one.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Oct 16, 2005)

it doesn't, but that doesn't mean theat it can't.  as far as i see it, it is an infra-red receiver attached to a usb cable, that you can also put an ipod into.  that apple is restricting its use doesn't mean that it is a technical impossiblity.

they just want to sell iMacs.


----------



## jeb1138 (Dec 15, 2005)

fryke said:
			
		

> ...I found it a funny idea to control a big iPod with a small one.



Except that this 'small one' is wireless.

Stringing a cord across your front room isn't very pretty.  And we all know what Jobs tells us about aesthetics.


----------

