Skip

iPod, uPod, we allPod.
October 26, 2004 5:46 PM   Subscribe

AppleFilter. There's a new iPod out, with a 60 gig harddrive, colour screen, and iPhoto compatibility. There's also a Super Keen Black iPod, with U2 on it or something.
posted by hughbot (57 comments total)

 
Yeah, yeah Pepsi Blue, etc.

I thought this was kinda neat, plus, would you rather hear about some new gadget, or about the DamnElection?
posted by hughbot at 5:47 PM on October 26, 2004


I'm not really sure why people would need the photo iPod. Are there a significant people who need to carry around 60GB of photos in their pocket?
posted by gyc at 5:55 PM on October 26, 2004


i wonder when pb g5 or pb dual g4 will come out?

/obligatory
posted by shortfuse at 5:58 PM on October 26, 2004


i've heard that you can (or soon can) download pics from your digital camera/smartmedia card into it, so that you'll always have room for more pics, regardless.

I'm waiting for a camerapod myself tho.
posted by amberglow at 6:01 PM on October 26, 2004


I was rather annoyed with this release. Been waiting months for a 60gb iPod and then they come out with this photo nonsense?! Ugh. Useless. I wish they'd put out a 60 "regular" iPod. I'd be all over that but I won't bother upgrading to a thicker unit with a color (useless) screen and tv out. *sigh*
posted by dobbs at 6:05 PM on October 26, 2004


red + black != super keen
posted by smackfu at 6:08 PM on October 26, 2004


Eh, I was excited at first but for $600, it's not how I fly.

The photo concept is neat. I'd like the ability to store my photos in something the size of a thick credit card. "Hey you want to see how the pictures turned out from last weekend?" and flip out my wallet. I don't know if screen technology, batteries and storage capabilities are there yet -- but that would be a killer appliance.
posted by geoff. at 6:10 PM on October 26, 2004


Up to 60GB of phots means a really cool way to share your pictures with your family and friends. See slide shows, with music, on the little screen or on a TV.
posted by scalz at 6:11 PM on October 26, 2004


I'm holding my breath for .ogg support and video playback. So, uhh, I'll be holding my breath for quite some time.
posted by Evstar at 6:13 PM on October 26, 2004


The 60GB isn't just for photos - the new iPods do photos and music.

And yeah, $600 is steep. And yeah, I'd like to be able to pay $400 for a 60GB w/no photo stuff.
posted by eustacescrubb at 6:22 PM on October 26, 2004


I am a long long time Mac-head and I am not quite sure about this one. I can see some applications for it but they'll have to up that screen size by quite a bit to make this viable for me as a portable photoalbum.

Besides, I just got a new 'Pod and the little lady says I'm not allowed to upgrade again for a while. I wouldn't upgrade to this until its got a whole lot more under the hood.
posted by fenriq at 6:22 PM on October 26, 2004


Evstar Blue™
posted by Dick Paris at 6:25 PM on October 26, 2004


Meanwhile, U2 fans are freaking out a little over this Complete U2 "digital box set." If you slap all their albums, including Best Ofs and side projects and fanclub-only releases, into it, you only come at 200-something tracks. And this supposedly has over 400. Even with all the b-side songs, you only make it to 300... of course, it could just be a raft of terrible heard-them-before remixes. But we're curious, oh yes. If this really does end up being the full U2 catalog -- including all the out-of-print, vinyl-only sort of things -- then it's actually a pretty major deal for the music industry. Nobody's done THAT yet.

As for the iPod Photo -- yeah, I covet it, since I've outgrown my 40GB iPod, but it's so far out of my price range it's unfair. But then, lunch is out of my price range at the moment.
posted by logovisual at 6:27 PM on October 26, 2004


Somebody, please, please tell me what application this Photo iPod has other than....

THE ABILITY TO CARRY AND VIEW 60 GIGS OF PORN ANYWHERE

Can anybody even THINK of another way to use this? Hello?! McFly?!
posted by Stan Chin at 6:32 PM on October 26, 2004


If by "super keen" you actually mean THE UGLIEST THING EVER, then yes.. super keen.

Also, with those kind of prices, why not just get a portable media player that does video too, and at a lower price? I mean, really... Who settles for porn galleries anymore?

Hope to hear about an upgraded powerbook soon though... :o)
posted by lotsofno at 6:35 PM on October 26, 2004


I'm holding my breath for .ogg support and video playback. So, uhh, I'll be holding my breath for quite some time.

Add to that the variety of RAW formats (I always shoot in RAW.) There are, of course, portable storage devices for digital shoots but clearly the latest IPod Photo is a consumer friendly device and doesn't pretend to be otherwise.

I'm holding my breath for the Jonathon Richman and the Modern Lovers edition. So I too will be holding my breath for quite some time!
posted by juiceCake at 6:35 PM on October 26, 2004


re: the U2 albums, U2 have released several discs for members of their fan club only - a live album from the PopMart tour, and two discs of remixes. There's also the band's twenty-odd songs that got released vinyl-only before they signed with Island (when they were punk rawk - totally worth listening to just to hear Bono sing "oh-ya!")
posted by eustacescrubb at 6:36 PM on October 26, 2004


So what exactly does this do (other than having a 60 gig version) that the H3x0 series doesn't?
posted by kickingtheground at 6:43 PM on October 26, 2004


Personally I prefer the Rio Karma... I like its shape better.
posted by clevershark at 6:47 PM on October 26, 2004


lotsofno: there was a recent soundbite from some Apple marketing guy saying that the laptops are staying where they are until after the holiday season.
posted by neustile at 7:04 PM on October 26, 2004


That Rio Karma is hilarious-- love the panic button.
posted by gwint at 7:07 PM on October 26, 2004


The 60GB isn't just for photos - the new iPods do photos and music.

I understand that. However, I have NO use for photos on an iPod (and I'm sure others are with me) and have no desire to pay extra $ for a color screen, software, larger battery (because of the color screen). I'd rather they ditch the bells and whistles and release a 60gb b&w iPod that's slimmer and cheaper.
posted by dobbs at 7:14 PM on October 26, 2004


Well, with multi-multi-multi-megapixel cameras that just keep getting bigger and bigger, images sizes are getting to be a log larger. Rather than carrying lots of compact flash cards or a laptop, it would be nice to offload images into the iPod for storage. I don't think I'd need 60 for now, but I can see needing it in a year or two, and I have no problem imagining somebody with so much music that they need 60 now.

Plus, you can get a 40 GB with the same features for $100 less, so if you don't need 60, it's not like you have to buy 60. I'd rather have some kind of CompactFlash reader built in, but to accommodate all the various media types, they'd probably need to make it a bunch bigger, and I'm not sure that would be a good trade off. I know there are third party solutions for that, but I don't like them.

I don't know if I'm going to upgrade or not. My third iPod was the 40GB model with the buttons on top. I hate the buttons on top, and I'd like a 15 hour battery, but I'll probably wait for the next generation. I do hate those buttons though, so maybe...
posted by willnot at 7:18 PM on October 26, 2004


Yeah, the photo iPod seems kinda lame. Showing your grandparents some vacation pictures isn't exactly a killer app. I think Jobs is setting the stage for another technology. What it is, I'm not sure.

Some geeks found the capability to add an audio recorder while mucking around in the firmware of a previous generation's iPod. several months before the peripheral was released.

I can only imagine the sorts of 3rd party attachments that will be available for the 4th generation iPod. Digital video camera? TV Tuner? Bluetooth plugin? Perhaps this iPod will be like a little portable TiVo--it's already wired to be connected to a television. The dock even has S-Video in.
posted by LimePi at 7:36 PM on October 26, 2004


Why I don't see the point:

My digital camera can already show videos on a TV. I think that's fairly common. It also has a screen about the size of the iPod's. Woo. Yes, the iPod has more capacity, but people only want to see my new photos, and they'll fit on a 512 MB CompactFlash. (Which is $46. )
posted by smackfu at 7:50 PM on October 26, 2004


it would be nice to offload images into the iPod for storage.

But I can already buy an attachment for my iPod that will download photos off of memory cards onto the iPod. The color screen and the video out just seems to add very little additional functionality.

I suspect that Apple is working on uploading and viewing movies on the iPod. The problem they have now is that they don't have a movie cataloging program like they have for music and photos. Perhaps they're going to update Quicktime to catalog and organize as well as playback movies and then add video syncing and playback ability on the iPod.
posted by gyc at 7:54 PM on October 26, 2004


Can it run OS7? OS9 would be nice too.
posted by b1tr0t at 7:56 PM on October 26, 2004


Well, ok, I guess for the extra money, paying this amount just to be able to also carry along a bunch of photos and a color screen along with my music is a little steep.

It would be nice if this iPod upgrade had a little more to it. Sure, I agree with the above complaints.

With that out of the way now, I will also say:

Holy crap this thing is still totally cool and I wish I had enough money to buy one even though I have absolutely no use for it. I wish I could buy the black one too becuase it's amazingly cool looking with the exception of u2's autographs on the back becuase I don't like them.

So there.
posted by punkrockrat at 8:07 PM on October 26, 2004


Is that 60GB of photos in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?
posted by naxosaxur at 8:10 PM on October 26, 2004


Heh, now that would be something. Just boot into classic.

Actually, I imagine some enterprising soul is going to get Linux to work on it eventually and then a whole host of emulators.

But thumbs down on the black iPod. I was hoping for something like the NeXT mysterious matte black, or at least U2 spy plane black -- something that made you ask "how much more black could this be?". Instead we have glossy black and -- bright red? And you have to answer: this could have been much more black.

Then again, I thought the colored iMacs were ugly, too.
posted by weston at 8:11 PM on October 26, 2004


Then again, I thought the colored iMacs were ugly, too.

The Snow iMac was pretty sweet, sort of a precursor to how the iPod and new iMac look.

But anyone remember Dalmation or the Flower one? Geeze, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple didn't sell a damn one of those Beasts.
posted by hughbot at 8:51 PM on October 26, 2004


I still think a nice 8-track player is a smarter purchase.

History will bear me out. Just you wait.
posted by jonmc at 9:01 PM on October 26, 2004


60GB still not enough for yo ass? Try 100GB
posted by plebmaster at 9:15 PM on October 26, 2004


I wouldn't be surprised if Apple didn't sell a damn one of those Beasts.

They did sell at least one. We have one in the A/V room at my school.
posted by Evstar at 9:41 PM on October 26, 2004


The things I like most about the iPod (being a convert from a simple CD discman) go well beyond the technology and aesthetics. Things like smart playlists, rating songs on the fly, easy syncing and most of organizational features of iTunes all work together in a way that is purely simple and genius. It sounds corny, but it has totally changed the way I listen to music and I think this would take a lot more work on my own part if I had purchased one of the competitions units. I have been using it straight for 3 months and, surprizingly, haven't even starting loading my favourite albums into it because I have been too busy salvaging compilations, singles and soundtracks which have been collecting dust in my collection. Sure, I used to make CD-R mixes with some of my favourites from these, but this process of encoding and then re-purposing has really blown my mind. Having all of a band's EP and B-Sides and my grasp is awesome. Sometimes I find I am crippled by the choice, but I guess that is a good problem to have. Looking at the iPod Photo (something I might consider when my Palm Zire 71 bites the dust or I win the lottery) I see how it could make photo sharing a breeze, especially since I rarely print pics myself or get them printed. Sure my camera can hook up to my TV, but I usually just have my recent shots loaded on it. With this gadget, I could sync my 5 star photos and share them at the drop of a hat. Overall, with this product I am all for being rewarded for a form of laziness and I want to thank Apple is doing the dirty work for me.
posted by boost ventilator at 9:51 PM on October 26, 2004


Agh, so close and yet so far! I've been waiting for an oh-so-cool black iPod, and what do they offer? Shiny (ew) black, with an ugly red center (double ew), chrome back (ugh), and laser-engraved signatures from the members of a washed-up 80's band? Come on.

Oh, the disappointment...

And the photo thing is kind of cool in an ultra-geeky sort of way, but I agree with others that it's pretty useless. And the price point is much too high for what it is.
posted by Watsonne at 9:58 PM on October 26, 2004


Bah. That U2 iPod is ugly. I am going to buy some sort of mp3 player soon to take jogging and with me to work, I haven't decided what to get. I do not think I want to buy an iPod, I do not like the looks of them, I have no interest in iTunes and the damn aac files.

As for the U2 "digital box set", I would be interested if they offered this as a physical box set, but I could not care less as it is.
posted by bargle at 10:23 PM on October 26, 2004


Reiterating and elaborating on what kickingtheground said, iRiver's product already records either voice or inline directly to mp3, has an FM tuner, and doesn't come with all of that Apple baggage that I hate. Plus they have a really cool, kinda softcore porn marketing campaign.
posted by greasepig at 10:41 PM on October 26, 2004


And another thing, isn't anyone else bothered by those ads where they're dancing around like banshees with those white pod earphones? They have to be epoxied into the ears, because I can't walk more than three steps before those kinds of earphones fall right out.
posted by greasepig at 10:52 PM on October 26, 2004


weston: nice Spinal Tap reference.
posted by litlnemo at 1:22 AM on October 27, 2004


boost ventilator's spot on about the usefulness of managing your photos, I think. Rather than a dumb "here is a dump of all your photos", it would be nice to have a smart sync, "playlists", etc.

That said, I agree that the cost/benefit is still marginal. This has to be some kind of stop-gap technology. At the very least, I'd expect someone to build a camera attachment that automatically downloads- though that would turn out to be fairly unwieldy with the added bulk.

Re: U2. It's a brilliant move- it opens to door for so many marketing possibilities for other bands. If they ever settle their differences, a Beatles branded iPod would be awesome. And I'm sure Deadheads everywhere are giddy at the thought of 60 megs of concerts pre-loaded on an iPod.
posted by mkultra at 1:39 AM on October 27, 2004


I think one of the things the new screen will facilitate is for album/single covers to be displayed while a track plays.
posted by davehat at 2:33 AM on October 27, 2004


I'm a former iPod owner (and current owner). I have an iPod mini, which I use with an armband to work out. But I also wanted something with higher capacity.

When it came down to it, I had the choice of a Dell 20GB, or an iPod 20GB. With the iPod, I would get 20GB iPod for $299. The price when I bought my Dell was $195.

Now, as much as I love the flow of iTunes, and the ease of the interface of the iPod (I've had various iPods since my first 5GB) I could not justify $105 additional in funds for something that is supposed to do one thing... play music.

Now, some of functionality that is in iTunes, Microsoft stole that from them. And with auto-sync in Windows Media Player 10, it pretty much makes any MP3 player act like an iPod would act, with a few exceptions, notably the interface.

But you're talking about something that goes in your pocket and you forget about it. Headphones on, control with the inline remote (if you buy it extra at the 20GB level, comes free with other players).

I also don't understand the color iPod Photo. While I like the color screen, and the ability to display album art, it detracts from what I want a music player to do... play music. I don't need to carry my photos around with me, I can e-mail people later. With Internet connections becoming more and more prevelant, I can just pull up my online photo album to show people, and they will see much larger versions that what they would see on a tiny iPod screen.

Apple has a history of charging a premium for its products, with the thinking that they can do it. So far, they've been able to pull it off. But with a new crop of devices coming on board, and online music services such as Wal-Mart and Real undecutting the iTunes Music Store, Apple may need to take a closer look at where it is going with these devices.
posted by benjh at 4:53 AM on October 27, 2004


I have no interest in iTunes and the damn aac files.

True, you can't get around iTunes but you don't have to use AAC files. Apple Loseless AIFF, WAV and MP3s work just fine. You just have to give up Window Media Player files (although it plays unincripted ones on a PC), which is similar to giving up self-mutilation.

As for the U2 "digital box set", I would be interested if they offered this as a physical box set, but I could not care less as it is.

Speaking of price point, how much would a 30 CD set of music set you back? I would guess about $500, not $149.

Personally, I am a CD addict (who begrudginly made the supposed "evolution" from vinyl) and I am surprized by how much I don't miss the things now. I still make varied mixes (with ease, I might add) and I keep the playlists for reference so I don't reburn songs for friends. I am still not excited about the iTunes Music Store, but I did join Emusic and have found tons of tunes there.

...has an FM tuner

Or you can just get the closest thing to a TiVo for an iPod. Although, personally I have given up on radio and wish this had of been available decades earlier.

As for sex selling the iRiver, the first thing I can think of when I look at the ads is not music. Clever marketing or insecurity complex? I wouldn't trust models with my tech purchases not do I think they are attracted to my overt geekiness.

I think if you use an iPod you will see the difference. I know it is a friggin cult and all, but if Apple had loaners available that people could test drive for a week there would be no going back. It goes beyond just going from playing cds to having digital playlists. I had the capability to play MP3s portably for over a year with my Zire 71 and tried it twice before giving up on it compoletely. I am not saying that they are at all technical equals (I only had a 256 meg card), but the frustration level and ease of use were not even comparable to the mindless integration of the iPod and my music.
posted by boost ventilator at 4:58 AM on October 27, 2004


I'd rather have one of these.
posted by nthdegx at 6:27 AM on October 27, 2004


I was far more interested in this:

"Apple today also announced it will launch the iTunes Music Store in Canada in November."

It's only a one-line aside in the release about the EU iTunes store (now in Luxembourg!), but it's still welcome. Actually gives me a reason to consider the iPod now. 'bout time.
posted by GhostintheMachine at 6:30 AM on October 27, 2004


Nthdegx: Yeah, but you need to buy extra media just to hold like songs, plus, I don't trust Sony worth half-a-crap when it comes to quality. My PS1 lasted like a year before the laser crapped out, and I've heard a lot of horror stories re: PS2 Lasers.
posted by hughbot at 6:59 AM on October 27, 2004


Typical overpriced offering from Apple. Nice product, but way too much for a gadget that does not offer anything better than the competition.
posted by monkeyman at 7:28 AM on October 27, 2004


Who the heck is this marketed towards?

It doesn't have a card reader built-in, so it's useless as a data dump while I'm out taking pictures. Oh, sure, I can buy a craptacular reader for MORE money, but it's slow as hell.

And TV out? Big whoop, my camera already does that. A lot already to this. And for what? So I can look at my beautiful 6 MP images on a friggin' TV SET!? WHY? Do you KNOW what the resolution of a TV set is? Lemme give you a hint: only marginally better than the iPod's built-in LCD screen.

Well, at least my pictures are portable now. Because God knows I couldn't just burn it to a CD/DVD and give a copy to my friends before. Thank you, Apple. This is just what I never wanted.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 9:38 AM on October 27, 2004


I'm with DaveHat: Album art. Also visualizations, so you can space out with your music even more on the subway. And of course Porn, for those private moments.
posted by alms at 10:04 AM on October 27, 2004


Me, I'm all about the iPod mini. But that's because I'm a lucky winner of a raffle. I do like how tiny and sturdy it is, and the anodized surface, as opposed to the shiny surfaces of the big iPods.

The controls are a riot, too, and metadata-based browsing is nice and will discipline me into cleaning up my id3 tags for real. On the flip side, I cannot for the life of me understand why I can't just manually upload a song to a folder on the mounted iPod and have it process it the next time it boots, and have to use its API instead.

iTunes for Windows, though, is an abomination if I've ever seen one. It broke my friggin' DVD driver! Not to mention that its habits effectively make it spyware. I had to clean up the registry after it to make the driver load again. Luckily there's the Winamp plugin and other programs to make life bearable on Windows.
posted by azazello at 10:27 AM on October 27, 2004


How am I the first person in this thread to wonder why this thing doesn't include a (1MP, at least) camera?
I did read every post, but may have missed the one where someone asked the question. Assuming that I didn't, however, this thing is supposed to be cutting-edge? You can buy keychains and phones with built-in cameras for chrissakes! Samsung just announced a 5MP version of the latter (I'm too lazy to find a link, but I promise it's true).
posted by Sinner at 10:54 AM on October 27, 2004


How am I the first person in this thread to wonder why this thing doesn't include a (1MP, at least) camera?

Steve Jobs addresses this in New York Times:
In focusing on still pictures, Mr. Jobs showed he was moving in a direction different from competitors in the consumer electronics industry, which have been adding video capabilities to hand-held devices. Mr. Jobs disagreed that video was a must-have feature in new devices. 'Our competitors are saying it's video,' he said, 'but they're too big to fit in your pocket,'
and the Los Angeles Times:
Other companies have recently come out with hand-held media devices that play music, movies and TV shows and also display photos but 'they're too big, too heavy,'" Jobs said, as quoted by the Los Angeles Times. "We think the right place is photos," Jobs said. .."Everybody has a digital camera -- they're even in cellphones. Everyone has the content. And there are no copyright issues. We think music plus photos is the next big thing.
posted by kirkaracha at 12:19 PM on October 27, 2004


kirkaracha is OTM--this is going not, as some have argued (like at Engadget) towards video convergence, but towards still-photo camera convergence, IMO. Which will be great: it'll be small and cut down on the number of gadgets you'll carry on a day-to-day basis.

Personally I think the photo iPod is cool, though I can't afford one by a long shot. I hope the price comes down. Right now I have some pictures on my Palm T2, and I don't use them for any purpose other than looking at them from time to time--photos of family, fun events, vacations, and so on. It's really nice having them; now I *look* at them more often, in the same way the iPod lets you listen to all those dusty CDs more often. I suspect that the same principle is at work--for example, I could imagine my train commute in the morning being more fun if I could listen to music and look through some pictures of my family to while away the time. It'll be even better if, someday, I can take pictures with the iPod, with quality around what Casio offers with the Exilim.
posted by josh at 12:36 PM on October 27, 2004


punkrockrat: ColorWare offers iPods in 20 stylish colors.

*wants a bright ass yellow one*
posted by esch at 1:25 PM on October 27, 2004


Bah. I think the black/red color scheme is cool.

I'm not paying more than $50 for a walkman, though, no matter how cool and modern it is.
posted by Mars Saxman at 2:04 PM on October 27, 2004


and now! the Ashlee Simpson Ipod! Like no other, iPod Ashlee Simpson Karaoke Edition stands out. Virgin white, it features the new Apple Fast-Forward Click Button and, on the flip side, complete how to use instructions. Available for just $349, it comes with enough money to use a pay phone for calling your daddy, your agent or both, when you get caught lip syncing live on national television. We have also included some Kleenex for those special times when your entire fan base realizes your nothing but a talentless hack.
posted by amberglow at 9:38 AM on October 28, 2004


« Older Stern versus Powell.   |   Collect Britain Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post