# What Do You Think of the new iPods?



## Spiral Girl (Sep 7, 2007)

Hello,

Well I certainly was doing the happy dance when I saw the new iPod line up.  This past January I was given money towards an iPod and have waited this long because I kept hearing a new one was coming out.  Of course the widescreen was the one I wanted as I've never owned an iPod.

Now that they are all out for the world to see I don't know which one to get.  Obviously I want the gadget part of the iPod Touch and the coolness factor but 8 GB is small and that is the only one I can afford.  Plus iPhones haven't even come out in Canada so I think the Touch will be a big hit here.  Then again the new nano's are adorable with great new colours.  The reason I never bought a nano before was because there was no video.  Again I have no idea if 8 GB will be enough.  This brings me to the classic which is perfect as far as space because my collection can grow with either the 80GB or 160GB model.  The only problem I miss out on the widescreen option and wifi of the Touch.

Decisions, decisions.  Maybe I'm the only one having a hard time deciding.  I've watched the keynote speech by Steve Jobs and went ga ga goo over the new iPods.  Then I watched all the sample videos on apple.com (for some reason I couldn't get them to work on apple.ca, I kept getting Quicktime symbol with the question mark inside).

S.


----------



## karavite (Sep 7, 2007)

I personally am thrilled. I confess, I do not yet own one. I worked at home for years and my Mac is essentially my iPod and has been since the day iTunes came out. And this is a guy who has owned 12 Macs and was an early Newton adopter! However, this will change. The new line up is very appealing to me, but now it is too hard for me to choose! At first I thought Nano all the way, but the Touch UI is very appealing to me. However, when you have a "classic" iPod with 80GB for under $300, well, that is a no brainer for me. Of ocurse if there was a 80 GB touch with some of the cool Nano colors for under $300 that would be it!


----------



## nixgeek (Sep 7, 2007)

While I wouldn't get an iPhone (now mainly because I'm happy with T-Mobile since the price is no longer an issue), the iPod touch is definitely something I would purchase.  I was looking at the Nokia N800 but it looks like the iPod touch can do pretty much the same thing I want to do on the N800, but with the elegance of Apple.


----------



## fryke (Sep 7, 2007)

I'd go for the iPod touch 8 GB then, if that's the one you can afford. Both 8 and 16 GB will feel restrictive if you have a growing media archive. (And believe me: Owning an iPod makes it seem growing ever faster...) But once you've accepted that not _all_ of your media fits on that iPod, you can set up lists that work for you. The screen, I hear, is really worth it considering video. Plus: You don't want to watch the same ten movies over and over again, right? You'll watch the ones you haven't watched yet, mostly. So the ones you've _already_ watched don't have to reside on the iPod necessarily.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Sep 7, 2007)

why oh why oh why did they not just stick an 80gb single-platter hdd in the touch and be done with it?  it'd still be thinner than the iPhone probably...

solve all problems all at once.


----------



## nixgeek (Sep 7, 2007)

fryke said:


> I'd go for the iPod touch 8 GB then, if that's the one you can afford. Both 8 and 16 GB will feel restrictive if you have a growing media archive. (And believe me: Owning an iPod makes it seem growing ever faster...) But once you've accepted that not _all_ of your media fits on that iPod, you can set up lists that work for you. The screen, I hear, is really worth it considering video. Plus: You don't want to watch the same ten movies over and over again, right? You'll watch the ones you haven't watched yet, mostly. So the ones you've _already_ watched don't have to reside on the iPod necessarily.



This is very true, and one of the reasons I haven't bought a large capacity iPod in the past.  I have a 4 GB nano that has yet to be filled to capacity.  I have about 18 albums and 14 podcasts that I listen to.  I only have the iPod load the podcasts that I haven't listened to yet, so it conserves space.

So far, I'm only using 75% of the 4 GB on the nano.  Something like the iPod touch (be it 8 GB or 16 GB) would be more than enough for me.  Plus, I could possibly browse the web.  And since there is no phone to deal with, there would be more justification for native third party apps since I can't bring down AT&T's network.


----------



## icemanjc (Sep 7, 2007)

Lt Major Burns said:


> why oh why oh why did they not just stick an 80gb single-platter hdd in the touch and be done with it?  it'd still be thinner than the iPhone probably...
> 
> solve all problems all at once.


Thats what I was screaming when I saw how much space it had, but I guess it would kill battery life. But why can't they think of people like me, I don't care if it drops that battery power down 5 hours thats what those big add on batteries are for.


What I found out is that you can fit a lot of videos on an ipod because there not a big screen, so I can reduce a 700 mb file to like 200-300 mb.


----------



## Qion (Sep 7, 2007)

If the 8GB iPod touch had an 80GB spinning disc instead, or even if I knew I could mod it to have one, I'd buy one in the next five minutes and another tomorrow just for good measure! :/


----------



## Mikuro (Sep 7, 2007)

I imagine a lot of people are stressing out over the choice now, and I don't think that's good for Apple. Up to now, buying an iPod has always been a no-brainer. The cheapest one was the smallest and had the fewest features, and it just went up from there. Simple. Now it goes up, up, up, and then we have this new "iPod Touch", which looks like it should be better, is priced like it should be better, and has a bunch of new features, but has just a fraction of the storage space. I think Apple is going to lose customers because of this. People aren't going to be happy choosing between lots of storage space and a fancy screen. Apple needs to find a way to cram a hard disk in there, for simplicity's sake.

It's a great time to be in the market for a Nano, though. 

The iPod Touch does look pretty nice. If it had full third-party app support, I'd be drooling all over it. I know, I know: in time. Apple's not ready to enter the PDA market. It's frustrating, though, since their current products are _so close_.


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 7, 2007)

karavite said:


> The new line up is very appealing to me, but now it is too hard for me to choose! At first I thought Nano all the way, but the Touch UI is very appealing to me. However, when you have a "classic" iPod with 80GB for under $300, well, that is a no brainer for me. Of ocurse if there was a 80 GB touch with some of the cool Nano colors for under $300 that would be it!



Karavite,

That is exactly what I want an 80 GB iPod Touch with cool colours and I'd be in heaven.  Now I'm left deciding between space and fancy screen.

S.


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 7, 2007)

fryke said:


> I'd go for the iPod touch 8 GB then, if that's the one you can afford. Both 8 and 16 GB will feel restrictive if you have a growing media archive. (And believe me: Owning an iPod makes it seem growing ever faster...) But once you've accepted that not _all_ of your media fits on that iPod, you can set up lists that work for you. The screen, I hear, is really worth it considering video. Plus: You don't want to watch the same ten movies over and over again, right? You'll watch the ones you haven't watched yet, mostly. So the ones you've _already_ watched don't have to reside on the iPod necessarily.



fryke,

Good point, thanks.  Also considering that now too as I can be more selective in my music and podcasts etc.  Good to know my collection will grow when I have an iPod.  I went into itunes to see how many GB I had and was shocked to find I had 15 GB but I don't listen to all that stuff on there, I've just collected over the years.

S.


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 7, 2007)

icemanjc said:


> What I found out is that you can fit a lot of videos on an ipod because there not a big screen, so I can reduce a 700 mb file to like 200-300 mb.



icemanjc,

Yes, someone pointed that out to me too.  If you read the specs on Apple's page it mentions the video quality (can't remember like 640xsomething) and you can shrink your videos to a much smaller size and get more video on there.  So I'm thinking about that too.  By the time I decide they will have a new model out probably.   My plan is to wait until my local store gets them all in (I'll have to wait until the end of the month for the Touch one) and then I'll go down and look at all of them and decide from there.

Also waiting for more detailed reviews of all of them like Macworld does, (they have a first glance article up there now) and then I'll see the pros and cons.

S.


----------



## Mario8672 (Sep 8, 2007)

I recently bought a new iPod Video. I saw the iPod touch and had to watch the keynote! I was wow'd by the features. I was about ready to get a refund for my iPod Video. However, then Steve said that it only came in 8GB and 16GB, and that isn't enough storage for my music. 

On the topic of the iPod Classic and Nano, I think that the all metal designs aren't as nice looking as the glass. They are harder to clean as well.

The new GUI of the iPods are both good and bad. In the main menu, the album/video/photo previews seem to take up too much room. I hope they can be turned off as well.

In conclusion, I think it's a really great new lineup, with a few changes to be had.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Sep 8, 2007)

what happens if you put a 720x400 video on an iPod?  i know the 640x480 thing, but the total amount of pixels is less, for the 'larger' video. (28,000 pixels vs 30,700)


----------



## chevy (Sep 8, 2007)

Lt Major Burns said:


> why oh why oh why did they not just stick an 80gb single-platter hdd in the touch and be done with it?  it'd still be thinner than the iPhone probably...
> 
> solve all problems all at once.



That was my dream too... but let's take it as it is, the 160 GB classic and the 8 GB touch a both very impressive products.


----------



## Thank The Cheese (Sep 8, 2007)

the iPod Touch is a turd. 

add email app and we'll talk. Add maps and notes, too, and I'll give you my credit card details.


----------



## Mario8672 (Sep 8, 2007)

It is a bit of a hassle to use. You have to grab it out of your pocket, "unlock" it, find out where you are in the GUI and touch a bunch of things to get where you wanna go. It's a good device when you're sitting down, but if you're on the go and walking, it's really tedious. Wouldn't the screen get scratched within a week of regular usage?


----------



## icemanjc (Sep 8, 2007)

chevy said:


> That was my dream too... but let's take it as it is, the 160 GB classic and the 8 GB touch a both very impressive products.



I don't see why they couldn't put a 200 gb  or 250 gb hard drive in the classic.


----------



## Veljo (Sep 8, 2007)

icemanjc said:


> I don't see why they couldn't put a 200 gb  or 250 gb hard drive in the classic.



Doesn't the iPod Classic use a 1.8" hard disk? I thought 160 was about as big as they come at the moment without insane pricing.


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 8, 2007)

Mario8672 said:


> It is a bit of a hassle to use. You have to grab it out of your pocket, "unlock" it, find out where you are in the GUI and touch a bunch of things to get where you wanna go. It's a good device when you're sitting down, but if you're on the go and walking, it's really tedious. Wouldn't the screen get scratched within a week of regular usage?



Mario8672,

Thanks, good point.  That is what I'm wondering about but I read on some review that you could use a partial remote control that allows you to rewind, fast forward and pause but it's something you have to buy extra maybe.  Can't remember where I read this.

Also wondered about the scratches.

S.


----------



## Captain Code (Sep 8, 2007)

Thank The Cheese said:


> the iPod Touch is a turd.
> 
> add email app and we'll talk. Add maps and notes, too, and I'll give you my credit card details.



I'm betting that someone will find a way to copy the applications from the iPhone to the iPod Touch.  They're basically the same thing so I don't see why it can't be possible.  Also, the screen is the same glass I believe as the iPhone and it has been proven to be pretty resistant to scratches.

The iPod Classics do use a 1.8" HD and the 160GB is as big as they come.
http://www.macworld.com/news/2007/09/05/toshiba/index.php


----------



## Ifrit (Sep 9, 2007)

fryke said:


> I'd go for the iPod touch 8 GB then, if that's the one you can afford. Both 8 and 16 GB will feel restrictive if you have a growing media archive. (And believe me: Owning an iPod makes it seem growing ever faster...) But once you've accepted that not _all_ of your media fits on that iPod, you can set up lists that work for you. The screen, I hear, is really worth it considering video. Plus: You don't want to watch the same ten movies over and over again, right? You'll watch the ones you haven't watched yet, mostly. So the ones you've _already_ watched don't have to reside on the iPod necessarily.



Organizing media is a very personal matter. Currently my portable media archive has a size of around 17 GB. Often I am unsure what song or what video file I want to listen to or watch. Usually then, I remember stuff I didn't listen to for weeks but which would fit my current mood perfectly - and I always have these things on my fingertips with my generation 5 iPod. To sum it up, I hate micromanaging my media files - which defeats the purpose of a mediaplayer -, or waste valuable time on questions like: "What do I want to listen tomorrow?" Heck, I don't know. While I would love to purchase the iPod touch now, I will wait for the inevitable 30GB version


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Sep 9, 2007)

icemanjc said:


> I don't see why they couldn't put a 200 gb  or 250 gb hard drive in the classic.



160gb is the highest capacity a 1.8" disk (ipod size) comes in, it was actually released only about 2 weeks ago.  before that, 120gb was the biggest.

next size up is 2.5", which goes to about 200gb i think, and that's archos-size brick size.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Sep 9, 2007)

Spiral Girl said:


> Mario8672,
> 
> Thanks, good point.  That is what I'm wondering about but I read on some review that you could use a partial remote control that allows you to rewind, fast forward and pause but it's something you have to buy extra maybe.  Can't remember where I read this.
> 
> ...



the apple radio-remote for £30 will do that job.


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 9, 2007)

Lt Major Burns,

Thanks, I just noticed that looking on the Apple site yesterday and saw it works with the nano.  I'd like radio with my iPod anyway so that would be nice.

S.


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 9, 2007)

Ifrit said:


> Organizing media is a very personal matter. Currently my portable media archive has a size of around 17 GB. Often I am unsure what song or what video file I want to listen to or watch. Usually then, I remember stuff I didn't listen to for weeks but which would fit my current mood perfectly - and I always have these things on my fingertips with my generation 5 iPod. To sum it up, I hate micromanaging my media files - which defeats the purpose of a mediaplayer -, or waste valuable time on questions like: "What do I want to listen tomorrow?" Heck, I don't know. While I would love to purchase the iPod touch now, I will wait for the inevitable 30GB version



Ifrit,

Thanks for your thoughts.  Yes, that is what I'm trying figure out.  My itunes is about 16 GB now in size but I don't listen to all of it.  The iPod Classic would be perfect for my itunes now and then I could put tonnes of videos on there.  The problem is I'm lured by the cuteness of the nano and the price of course and the cool factor of the iPod touch.  The thing is I'll shoot myself if I buy the iPod Touch now and it gets a lot bigger.  So I'm thinking I may go the route of the nano or classic but I think the best value for my money would be the classic considering storage.

S.


----------



## ApeintheShell (Sep 9, 2007)

Mario8672 said:


> It is a bit of a hassle to use. You have to grab it out of your pocket, "unlock" it, find out where you are in the GUI and touch a bunch of things to get where you wanna go. It's a good device when you're sitting down, but if you're on the go and walking, it's really tedious. Wouldn't the screen get scratched within a week of regular usage?



I find it funny how you just described every iPod released to date with the exception of the Shuffle.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Sep 9, 2007)

nah all the ipods with clickwheels you can do most things through denim, even change volume if you've got the skillz.


----------



## Qion (Sep 9, 2007)

Lt Major Burns said:


> nah all the ipods with clickwheels you can do most things through denim, even change volume if you've got the skillz.



Oh, foshizzle I got the skillllllzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Sep 9, 2007)

yes, but enough to pay the bills?


----------



## icemanjc (Sep 9, 2007)

Qion said:


> Oh, foshizzle I got the skillllllzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.



I can scroll and pick a song!!!!!


----------



## Mario8672 (Sep 9, 2007)

LOL @ these last few posts


----------



## fryke (Sep 10, 2007)

Ifrit said:


> Organizing media is a very personal matter. Currently my portable media archive has a size of around 17 GB. Often I am unsure what song or what video file I want to listen to or watch. Usually then, I remember stuff I didn't listen to for weeks but which would fit my current mood perfectly - and I always have these things on my fingertips with my generation 5 iPod. To sum it up, I hate micromanaging my media files - which defeats the purpose of a mediaplayer -, or waste valuable time on questions like: "What do I want to listen tomorrow?" Heck, I don't know. While I would love to purchase the iPod touch now, I will wait for the inevitable 30GB version


I just meant deciding between the 8 and 16 GB version didn't matter that much, because sooner or later you'd be micromanaging on _both_ devices - and once you are, the difference just isn't that important anymore. (Not 100$ important to me at least.)

However: Managing it can be fun. You can create a, say, 2 GB "basic" music list containing only songs that you really like to listen to on a regular basis. Then create a smartlist with, say 500 MB of the music most recently added (iTunes can do that, right?). So you have your basics (which you might want to change in a year or two) plus automatically the newest stuff, which is of importance _now_ but might fade into oblivion over time.
With video: Just let it synch the stuff you haven't seen yet.


----------



## icemanjc (Sep 10, 2007)

My only problem is, I do Apple Lossless which takes up alot of space, so when my library that used to be 4gb is now 10gb.


----------



## fryke (Sep 10, 2007)

Everybody heard that Apple's been further crippling the iPod touch when compared to its cousin, the iPhone? No adding contacts or calendar items on the iPod, "since it is an iPod", probably. So no notes, no Mail.app, no real PIM... If you want those, you have to either wait for hacks or get an iPhone instead (which isn't internationally available). Gosh, Apple, grow up already...


----------



## chevy (Sep 10, 2007)

I don't agree with your analysis. I don't think Apple is afraid to attack the iPhone with the iPod touch. If Apple can get 20M iPod touch instead of 5M iPod touch and 10M iPhone, it will.

Apple is a large company and it is #1 in some markets. It's only way to remain #1 in these agressive markets is to attack its own products with new products before others do so.


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 10, 2007)

fryke said:


> However: Managing it can be fun. You can create a, say, 2 GB "basic" music list containing only songs that you really like to listen to on a regular basis. Then create a smartlist with, say 500 MB of the music most recently added (iTunes can do that, right?). So you have your basics (which you might want to change in a year or two) plus automatically the newest stuff, which is of importance _now_ but might fade into oblivion over time.
> With video: Just let it synch the stuff you haven't seen yet.



fryke,

Thanks, you have given me a great idea.  I don't know the ins and outs of itunes with an iPod since I haven't owned one but that's a great idea to have a basic list and then a newer one with recent music.  Also I'm assuming as you add songs it tells you at the bottom how big your library is getting as I can go in now and see I have 15 GB of music I've collected over the years.

For me, having a 30 GB model would be perfect I think.  I don't think I'll ever use 80 GB of space but then again maybe I will.  The Nano seems really cool though with all it's new features.

S.


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 10, 2007)

fryke said:


> Everybody heard that Apple's been further crippling the iPod touch when compared to its cousin, the iPhone? No adding contacts or calendar items on the iPod, "since it is an iPod", probably. So no notes, no Mail.app, no real PIM... If you want those, you have to either wait for hacks or get an iPhone instead (which isn't internationally available). Gosh, Apple, grow up already...



fryke,

I heard that Notes is available on the iPod Nano but not the Touch.  Don't know if it's on the classic or not.

S.


----------



## fryke (Sep 10, 2007)

chevy said:


> I don't agree with your analysis. I don't think Apple is afraid to attack the iPhone with the iPod touch. If Apple can get 20M iPod touch instead of 5M iPod touch and 10M iPhone, it will.
> 
> Apple is a large company and it is #1 in some markets. It's only way to remain #1 in these agressive markets is to attack its own products with new products before others do so.



What analysis? You mean they actually _will_ release Mail.app and full iCal/Notes functionality on the iPod touch? Then why bother to remove it first? I'm with you and say: Let the iPod eat into iPhone's sales - but I guess Apple thinks "different" here: They already _have_ the music player market. They're after the highend mobile phone market now. And if one reason to buy an iPhone is that it's an iPod touch with more features, then that's one more for their book.


----------



## Qion (Sep 10, 2007)

You really shouldn't get upset. You obviously understand why the iPod touch is the way it is. There will inexorably be hacks to get Notes, Mail.app, and iChat onto the iPod touch -just like there is using an iPhone without an SIM card-.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Sep 10, 2007)

it's an ipod.  not a pda.  keep it simple.  yeah it's crap when people cripple stuff but it's business, they aren't a charity.


----------



## icemanjc (Sep 10, 2007)

Does the browser support Javascript?


----------



## symphonix (Sep 10, 2007)

It sounds like people are just jumping to conclusions on what the iPod touch will or won't do before we've even seen the first reviews and working demonstrations. To quote Apple, the screen is perfect for "entering calendar events, or adding new contacts." so yes, that functionality will be in there.

They aren't likely to leave out Notes either; I think Apple know that if they don't put these features on, people will just use simple workarounds such as using Google Apps online.

I think everyone is getting upset because they haven't seen that one useful feature, and most if not all of these things will be there. 



> Does the browser support Javascript?



All signs point to Yes. Especially the ADC article about optimising your website for use with iPhone Safari. Or the fact that Apple's website now relies heavily on JavaScript & Scriptaculous.


----------



## Mikuro (Sep 10, 2007)

It's not as baseless as all that. Apple has quite a few images of the iPod Touch's interface, and there are no Mail or Notes icons. Since the icons aren't there, I think it's safe to assume the apps aren't there. I doubt Apple would implement these things differently than in the iPhone.


----------



## Veljo (Sep 11, 2007)

I find it interesting that the majority of this thread's conversation revolves around the iPod Touch. What about the Nano, Classic and Shuffle?

I think the new Nanos look kind of weird, but the more I look at them the more they grow on me. I haven't seen one in person, so I'm wondering what video will look like on the tiny screen. I've ordered one nevertheless, so I guess we'll see.

The Classics look pretty good, loads of storage (more than I'd ever need) but nevertheless it's there.

Nothing really to say about the iPod Shuffle, just a whole assortment of new colours and a price drop. Both are welcome.

The iPod Touch is definitely revolutionary, and I see no problem with the 8 and 16GB storage. Of course loads of people have libraries larger than that, but how often do you actively listen to more than 16GB's worth?

I'm very happy with this set of iPod revisions, they're great. Good job Apple. Can't wait for them to arrive where I work (*insert shameless Dick Smith Electronics plug here*)


----------



## fryke (Sep 11, 2007)

symphonix said:


> To quote Apple, the screen is perfect for "entering calendar events, or adding new contacts." so yes, that functionality will be in there.



Sadly, Apple has _removed_ the portion about the calendar events from that info. That's what I was _talking_ about when talking about them removing the feature(s). Apparently, adding contacts is still _in_, which even more looks like actively crippling its features. Why should adding calendar info be any different from adding contact info in regards to simplicity... -> http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/breaking...liminates-add-button-from-calendar-297994.php for more information.


----------



## banjo_boy (Sep 11, 2007)

I completely agree, fryke, but I jump further.  Apple has done a disservice to the full iPod line in general.  The video out on the nano and classic no longer work the same as the 5.5G video iPod.  The iPod touch is half of what the iPhone is.  And the iPhone can only be used with a cell service!  Again, yes they are not a charity but their goal is customer satisfaction.  What they have done is provide half-baked versions of the iPod line just to get people to buy the iPhone with the jacked up price and cell service.  I was hoping to upgrade my iPod with this release but it has made me reconsider.

I just want someone to point out one PDA company that has removed entry and usability from WiFi only product to sell more of their Smartphones?  None.  Yeah, screens and other bling might be there but notes, contact, email, calendar, etc. doesn't change.  I know, Jobs never wanted to make a PDA, but he made the uber-smartphone, thus competing with Palm, Blackberry, Windows CE, etc.  He made a PDA.  Plain and simple.  He gave the public an inferior product, the iPod touch,  to push another, the iPhone.


----------



## fryke (Sep 11, 2007)

Well... Ever since Apple released the very first iPod, I noticed that it's in my best interest to buy a middle or highend model every other generation. I went from the 2G 10 GB iPod to the 4G 40 GB model and then to the 5.5G 80 GB model. Quite certainly, the current iPod classic line has nothing to lure me in. 80 gigs is still long enough for my media library needs, and I truly want to move to a widescreen touch model next. So I see two options for me:

1.) I'll wait for the next version of the iPod touch (or for updates/hacks that make the iPod touch what it could've been) with more features and more memory.

2.) I'll take a long hard look at the iPhone once it's released. (It's not yet released here, so I can't say what it's feature-set and drawbacks contract-wise will be.)

Either way: If the iPod 5.5G was good for me last year, I'm pretty sure the iPod 6G (classic) is a pretty good iPod this year, for other people. I like the design changes and a thinner 80 GB model sounds truly marvellous. Also, the nano seems like a _really_ nice step forward. I hate that games you've downloaded for a 5G iPod don't run on the fatty, but then again I don't think many people will downgrade from a 5G iPod to a nano.

I'll still have to go try an iPod touch once they arrive in stores here, if only to get a better feeling of what my iPhone will be like.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Sep 11, 2007)

played with a new nano, and also an 80gb classic.

nano:  so small it's getting silly.   when people see that it's fat, they don't realise that it's nearly half the size of the old one...  and it feels very thin too.  video is even more amazing than the old 5G full-fat, as all the UI overlays are in a really nice shiny translucent style.  didn't see coverflow on it, as there was no music loaded onto it, though.  really nice though.  _amazing_ for £100.

80GB classic:  bit of a let down actually.  i had all my money going for a 160gb, but i'm not so sure now.  they feel somewhat out-dated now... really heavy compared to the silly-small nano.  and kinda slow as well... - it had a load of music on it, so i tried out coverflow, and it's really sluggish, like the processor really isn't up to it.  also, it's not antialiased, so you notice the jaggies a lot.  a big meh.  i'm gonna have a wait till i can get my hands on a touch, and probably go for that in 16gb.  i've never had an ipod i didn't have to media-manage, so i suppose i can carry on.


----------



## fryke (Sep 11, 2007)

Apple, kinda, really f**d up with this release. Wouldn't it have been *MUCH* better to forget about the "classic" and instead have an iPod touch with 80 and 160 GB, even if it got quite heavy because of the harddrive? Seems to me, Apple's creating an inbetween-stage with these releases. In a year or two, I'm sure the classic will have to go...


----------



## Qion (Sep 11, 2007)

Are the 8/16GB flash memory units roughly the same cost as the 80/160GB HDDs?


----------



## Mario8672 (Sep 11, 2007)

Lt Major Burns said:


> played with a new nano, and also an 80gb classic.
> 
> nano:  so small it's getting silly.   when people see that it's fat, they don't realise that it's nearly half the size of the old one...  and it feels very thin too.  video is even more amazing than the old 5G full-fat, as all the UI overlays are in a really nice shiny translucent style.  didn't see coverflow on it, as there was no music loaded onto it, though.  really nice though.  _amazing_ for £100.
> 
> 80GB classic:  bit of a let down actually.  i had all my money going for a 160gb, but i'm not so sure now.  they feel somewhat out-dated now... really heavy compared to the silly-small nano.  and kinda slow as well... - it had a load of music on it, so i tried out coverflow, and it's really sluggish, like the processor really isn't up to it.  also, it's not antialiased, so you notice the jaggies a lot.  a big meh.  i'm gonna have a wait till i can get my hands on a touch, and probably go for that in 16gb.  i've never had an ipod i didn't have to media-manage, so i suppose i can carry on.


What do you mean "antialias"? WHat does this do?


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Sep 11, 2007)

Qion said:
			
		

> Are the 8/16GB flash memory units roughly the same cost as the 80/160GB HDDs?


i would imagine so.   to be honest though, although they *say* the new Classic is thinner, it has to be microns as even the 'thin' 80gb model i handled was still fairly hefty.  in fact, thinking about it, it actually feels like a step back.  the interface on the 5g was rapid, very fluid.  on the classic, it feels laggy.  also the fit and finish with the new aluminium faceplate feels a bit rough around the edges...  not as keen.  i'd probably plump for an 80gb 5G, if i wanted that sort of size.  the new one adds nothing to arena, but actually detracts in its bloat.  although my old 40gb fatty is pretty hefty and i managed quite well for years with it, the new ones feel really dated now.  i'm all for the touch line being flash only, although it'd be nice to see how much flash they can stick in them.   test of time now folks.

nano's are  top though, really nice, wonderful piece of engineering.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Sep 11, 2007)

Mario8672 said:


> What do you mean "antialias"? WHat does this do?



difficult to explain in an all encompassing way, and many people have done so already (google is your best bet)...  but here goes:

basically, when something on a screen isn't horizontal or vertical,  it looks all jaggedy as the pixels have to sit within their grid.  anti-aliasing smooths the edges.  cover flow has a lot of diagonals, as most of the squares are in perspective.  lots of jaggedy lines, as no smoothing is even being attempted.  pretty ugly.

like i say, google to put your mind at rest.


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 11, 2007)

Veljo said:


> I find it interesting that the majority of this thread's conversation revolves around the iPod Touch. What about the Nano, Classic and Shuffle?
> 
> I think the new Nanos look kind of weird, but the more I look at them the more they grow on me. I haven't seen one in person, so I'm wondering what video will look like on the tiny screen. I've ordered one nevertheless, so I guess we'll see.
> 
> The Classics look pretty good, loads of storage (more than I'd ever need) but nevertheless it's there.



Veljo,

Ditto, all the iPods are calling my name except for the shuffle.  I've never wanted that one unless I won one or saw it for really cheap somewhere.

The Nano's are adorable I think and one big reason I may get the Red one,  like the classic because of the room, and the Touch for the widescreen and technology.  Your right I probably would never use 80GB but it's nice to know it's there if my collection grows.  Also I think a lot of people like the idea of having a mini version of their computer on an iPod (I know I do, but I know that is not what the iPod is for)

I'm a few forums and have read so many problems with the Classic freezing and crashing and not working properly, also people are having problems with the Nano as well.  This may be isolated to a bad batch or something but I'm going wait a bit until it's all sorted out.  People have even returned the faulty ones several times only to get another faulty iPod and Apple hasn't given a solution yet to these people whose posts I've read.

S.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Sep 11, 2007)

i love my shuffle.  it so brilliant, after carting around a full ipod, something that weighs less that the half-length earphones i have, and doesn't need any input from me to work it.  listen to it on the tram into town to meet people, leave it in the bottom of my pocket all night then still have music for the drunken tram home again.  also, as it weighs nothing, it's great to go running with.  effortless chic.


----------



## Mario8672 (Sep 11, 2007)

Lt Major Burns said:


> difficult to explain in an all encompassing way, and many people have done so already (google is your best bet)...  but here goes:
> 
> basically, when something on a screen isn't horizontal or vertical,  it looks all jaggedy as the pixels have to sit within their grid.  anti-aliasing smooths the edges.  cover flow has a lot of diagonals, as most of the squares are in perspective.  lots of jaggedy lines, as no smoothing is even being attempted.  pretty ugly.
> 
> like i say, google to put your mind at rest.


Ohh I see! Thanks


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 11, 2007)

Lt Major Burns said:


> played with a new nano, and also an 80gb classic.
> 
> nano:  so small it's getting silly.   when people see that it's fat, they don't realise that it's nearly half the size of the old one...  and it feels very thin too.  video is even more amazing than the old 5G full-fat, as all the UI overlays are in a really nice shiny translucent style.  didn't see coverflow on it, as there was no music loaded onto it, though.  really nice though.  _amazing_ for £100.



Lt Major Burns,

Okay after reading this now I'm leaning the way of the red Nano iPod.  Okay I can also see why the shuffle is a great one too but only want one right now and have always wanted video on an iPod.  Also heard the podcast on Macworld that the shuffle is a great device because you can use if for a single  function like working out, as a travel thing etc.  Also they mentioned something about being able to transfer files or something like that and they weren't sure if the other ones could do that.

S.


----------



## bbloke (Sep 11, 2007)

With regards to the costs of different types of memory, for now, flash RAM is much more expensive than a hard disk drive.  I've seen various comparisons, but a ballpark figure is that it is (approximately) 50 times more expensive.  If anyone's curious, here are a few links which address the issues of flash vs. HDD based memory:

http://www.storagesearch.com/semico-art1.html

http://maltiel-consulting.com/Hard_disk_drives_vs_flash.htm

http://pcworld.about.com/magazine/2309p020id121946.htm

http://unbeknownst.net/?p=228


Of course, flash memory is quicker in usage and has the advantage of not using any moving components, which should make it more reliable.  I've tended to be more tempted by the iPod nano range, rather than the larger iPods, and many of the advantages were related to the type of memory used.  The nanos could be smaller, they were (hopefully!) more robust due to not using moving parts, the memory was very fast, and the energy consumption could be lower, increasing battery life.

I'd love to see the whole range of iPods move to flash memory, but I don't think that will happen soon.  Prices will need to come down further.  Either that or users will have to settle for much smaller storage capacities, but I don't think that will happen, particularly with increased interest in video!


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 11, 2007)

Hi,

I've been trying to look for reviews on the new iPods and found one here about the Nano:

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...g_video_ipod_in_a_nano_thin_shell.html&page=1

S.


----------



## Axeman21 (Sep 15, 2007)

I haven't been able to find any info yet on the cost of the connection for IPod Touch. the IPhone was a reasonable $20/mo with the phone contract, any idea on this one? And will they be stupidly restrictive (AT&T) like they were with the Phone?


----------



## Ferdinand (Sep 16, 2007)

Axeman21 said:


> I haven't been able to find any info yet on the cost of the connection for IPod Touch. the IPhone was a reasonable $20/mo with the phone contract, any idea on this one? And will they be stupidly restrictive (AT&T) like they were with the Phone?




It's not a phone, so it won't have any phone features, so it won't require a sim-card, so it has nothing to do with Cingular, or Verizon or any other mobile phone-network provider, so it won't be restricted to anything.


----------



## leonard.leotech (Sep 16, 2007)

When you see the new nanos in person, they really aren't that "chubby"...but amazingly thin..


----------



## fryke (Sep 16, 2007)

I think the "chubby" moniker was often misunderstood. It merely described that in comparison to the _very_ longish 1G and 2G nanos, the new nano is short and wide, i.e. chubby. It never was about its thickness.


----------



## kebosma (Sep 19, 2007)

I never owned an iPod, but last saturday I bought the new iPod Nano!

It's beautiful and 8GB is more than enough for me.

The iPod touch is even more beautiful, but I don't really understand the market place for this iPod, for 100 euros more you will eventually have the iPhone, which is also an iPod...


----------



## eric2006 (Sep 19, 2007)

kebosma said:


> for 100 euros more you will eventually have the iPhone, which is also an iPod...




..and a contract with AT&T

(depending on how the unlocking deal pans out)


----------



## Qion (Sep 19, 2007)

I went into Centennial tonight and they told me they could unlock my iPhone and have me pay for a data plan. I was for it until they told me no visual voicemail and that packages started at an extra $25 for 20 _megabytes_ of transfer. Shese.


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 20, 2007)

kebosma,

The market for the iPod Touch is for people who can't afford the iPhone or don't want it as a phone.  Also they don't want to be stuck paying $60.00 a month to use the iPhone.  I have a cheap Virgin phone and only pay $100.00 a year and I don't even use it that much but it's the cheapest option they had.

I'm going to check out the Nano and Classic today and it will be my first time seeing both of them.  The Touch isn't out yet here.  Is your Nano working okay?  I've heard about so many problems with the Nano and Classic on another forum that I'm afraid to buy either of them now.

S.


----------



## fryke (Sep 20, 2007)

... and countries where the iPhone simply _isn't_ available. It's not like we have a choice between the iPhone and the iPod touch here in Switzerland, currently. Neither do people in Canada, Australia, Japan, Italy and many, many more. It's not a 100$ difference for those countries. It's 100$ plus import costs plus using a hack that might or might not turn the iPhone into a 399$ brick.


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 20, 2007)

fryke,

Your right, I'm in Canada and the iPhone isn't here yet nor is the Touch. I keep hearing about unlocks for the iPhone but can't take the chance.

Switzerland is beautiful.  I did a Contiki tour years ago with my sister and we were in Switzerland for less than 24 hours (as someone on our trip hadn't renewed her Visa and we all got held back so our Swiss trip was cut short).  We were in Lauterbrunnen and the Muesli and Toblerone was unlike anything I've had.

S.


----------



## fryke (Sep 20, 2007)

... Haven't personally eaten any müäsli or Toblerone in years, I guess. It's all peanutbutter&jam sandwiches for me nowadays.  About the iPhone and iPod touch situation: I *HAVE* to hold back. No iPod touch for me. Gotta wait 'til I know which provider gets the iPhone.


----------



## kebosma (Sep 20, 2007)

Spiral Girl,

My iPod Nano is working fine, but, as mentioned in my post in the iPod section, the cover flow will not show all of my covers. I can see them in the main menu, when a slide show of all covers is given, but when I enter cover flow, most of them are gone.

I won't blame Apple for it, because they make beautiful products 

If they don't solve it, I will just ignore the problem and act like it isn't there


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 20, 2007)

kebosma,

Thanks.  Just came back from a store here that sells iPods and guess what they have no demo models out which just isn't going to work for me.  The Nano's though are way smaller than I imaged and the shuffle's are so tiny I couldn't believe it.  There wasn't a Classic visible so don't know about that.  They said they usually do and might later on so I'll have to wait.  In my city there are no official Apple stores here just lots of local stores that sell Apple products.  So I called around to like 4 other stores and no one has demo models out so will check with one last store that might tomorrow.  Otherwise I'll wait until I can hold one in my hand or stop someone on the street that has one.

S.


----------



## Spiral Girl (Sep 20, 2007)

fryke,

Poor you with no Muesli and Toblerone.  

I too don't want to buy a Touch if there is any chance I may get the Phone down the road.  Just curious if it will be $60.00 a month for whatever provider they go with here in Canada.

S.


----------

