'True' Video iPod Coming Soon 398
Moby Cock writes "Think Secret is reporting that the true video iPod is slated for announcement soon. It will have a 3.5 inch display and will eschew the mechanical click wheel in favour of a touch screen version. The 5th generation iPod released prior to the holiday season last year is described as a souped up 4G iPod with video capabilities. This new iPod will be the 'true' video iPod. It looks like there is not going to be wireless support. The article hints that the release date could be April 1 which is the 30th anniversary of Apple."
April 1st? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:April 1st? (Score:5, Interesting)
In all honesty, it's kind of a bummer that these sites are so obsessed with breaking Apple secrets all the time. Imagine how cool it would have been if nobody knew this was coming out, and bam, suddenly it's announced...or if nobody knew Intel machines were going to be at MacWorld (we knew months ahead of time thanks to "sources"). It really ruins the amazing announcement to have all these months of speculative hype leading up to it.
So to sum up... (Score:4, Insightful)
WTF.
Oh, and (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh, and (Score:4, Informative)
"Readers will recall that during the brouhaha leading up to the October release of the 5G iPod last year, Think Secret maintained that the video iPod would not be released at the time and, following the roll-out of the 5G iPod, that that iPod was "not the video iPod" but rather a souped up 4G iPod with video capabilities. This forthcoming iPod revision is what sources have said for some time will be the incarnation of a complete video iPod solution."
Re:April 1st? (Score:2)
Re:April 1st? (Score:5, Funny)
Oh please. Steve Jobs != Santa.
Re:April 1st? (Score:5, Funny)
True. Jobs is more smartly dressed.
Re:April 1st? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:April 1st? (Score:5, Interesting)
You'll note that they have been consistently wrong about everything that wasn't glaringly obvious since they were sued by Apple in effort to ferret out the internal leaker. In short, they lost the one actual source they ever had.
They (rumor sites in general) make shit up, plain and simple.
Usually, when rumors don't pan out they say things like "it was delayed at the last minute", or "it was suddenly cancelled". No matter how many times they get it wrong, they claim "reliable sources". No matter how many things actually happen that they didn't know about, they always report them as if they were predictions come true. That they've managed to get people to believe that Apple deliberately sends them misinformation is all part of the calculated chicanery that keeps such sites popular and profitable.
Re:April 1st? (Score:2)
No, Steve Jobs is just going to announce that it runs WinCE. That is one appropriately named OS.
-Charles
Re:April 1st? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:April 1st? (Score:3, Funny)
Something is coming out that day, may as well be something people have been asking for. I'm hoping Apple finally figured out how to make tablets better somehow, and will release one for their 30th. Failing that, the 30th anniversary Apple I would be great too.
yes, April 1st! why a "true" video iPod (Score:5, Interesting)
2) the current iPod is referred to as "iPod with video" and not "video iPod" on Apple.com. that specific wording is why people think Apple is reserving "video iPod" for something new. i guess technically the iPod with Video is considered a modified version of the latest iPod, and not a flat out video playback device. it also may explain those patents that surfaced recently about a touchscreen-like thing that made the rumor site go bananas thinking an Apple tablet was coming. (here is one example [macrumors.com]). add the reoccurring "Apple to buy Palm" rumor and you could write a book full of speculation wrapping up all these rumors into one crazy device if you want.
anyway, that's the background on those two bits.....
Re:April 1st? (Score:2)
I was getting really tired of the old "faux video".
No wireless... (Score:5, Funny)
I bet it has less space than a Nomad, too!
Re:No wireless... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:No wireless... (Score:5, Funny)
Great (Score:3, Funny)
OTOH, they could call it the foolPod or iFool something
Re:Great (Score:3, Funny)
What Else? (Score:2, Interesting)
Personally, I'm hoping for an Intel based Cube. Yea, I know it would compete with the mini. Just spin it as a super-mini or something. How much would you pay for a cube looking Intel based mac that is around the same size as a mini, but runs like an iMac without the screen?
Re:What Else? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What Else? (Score:2)
For most of their life they live in pockets, along with your keys and change... a touch screen would keep changing tracks when you walked around. Not good.
Re:What Else? (Score:3, Informative)
I have an iPod Photo and I think the other iPods are similar as far as having a switch that disables all the inputs. I am pretty sure this new iPod would have a similar switch to disable the touchscreen. A touchscreen would most definitely not be useless, just different then the current way to control the iPod.
What I would be worried about is scratching the screen. I have a case for my iPod that is a solid enclosure with clear, ha
10th Anniversary of the 20th Anniversay PowerMac (Score:4, Funny)
Book it. Imagine all the glory and price of the 20th Anniversary Mac... times ten!
Good luck cleaning your mind off the wall.
Re:What Else? (Score:2)
all sal
Fingerprints (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Fingerprints (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Fingerprints (Score:2)
Re:Fingerprints (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Fingerprints (Score:2)
I have a 3G ipod and my beef is that I accidentally click the buttons all the time. So I'd prefer something that you actually need to push.
Re:Fingerprints (Score:2)
Oh, wait...
Re:Fingerprints (Score:5, Funny)
Easy. iRub the screen with iSleeve.
Depressed (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Depressed (Score:2)
Give me a break (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Give me a break (Score:5, Insightful)
I've got a 3rd gen. It works just great. I'd like the nice clear screen on the 5th gen but I don't need it at all. I'll keep mine until it dies, or they come out with something great (built-in bluetooth or wifi would probably do it). My brother used his 1st gen up until last year when it was stolen. It worked just as well as any other iPod for listening to music.
All that said, at least they are improving their product. So many companies would be content to make a meaningless change every two years or so (and a meaningless one at that) and just rake in the cash. Apple may be raking in the cash, but they are improving their product too. Look at the storage difference between a 1st or 2nd gen and a 5th, along with the screen, battery life, and thickness and tell me they haven't made a substantially better product in many ways.
Re:Give me a break (Score:2)
Re:Give me a break (Score:2)
Ok, thanks for the advice! I'll look into it!
Re:Give me a break (Score:2)
Re:Give me a break (Score:3, Insightful)
Sheesh, by April 1st, it will have been seven months since the last iPod. It's not like it's that recent. They haven't announced anything, and this is just a rumor from a notoriously inaccurate rumor site, and already the Apple-bashers
Re:Give me a break (Score:2)
Re:Give me a break (Score:5, Insightful)
<curdmudgery>Now follows some of my experiences with and thoughts on gadgets on the go, video included - and why I won't be buying a video iPod anytime soon. Meh. Too many toys and too damned often. Find one that just does the job well and use it until it dies. Chances are there will be something shiny and 10 times better to replace it when your beloved device gives up the ghost and you won't be a pennyless gadget whore after waiting it out. Let the the other gadget whores support the constant onslaught for you. I mean c'mon, video on the go? I commute by train and see many folks squinting at their ipods and Archoses, er Archi, et al and it seems more a pain in the ass than anything. I even tried the whole video snarfing thing to my PSP - even had it scripted out so that other than the time consuming part of it I had to do little more than pick a show or two to suck off the Tivo, plug in the PSP to charge and download and then just dismount it grab and go in the morning. That lasted about 3 months at best. I went back to playing games on it or just reading and left the TV viewing for home. IMHO, Video-on-the-go is novel but unless you're on a long trip nothing replaces sitting down at the end of the day to a nice show or two. Why the hell do you want to spend your commute times or lunch in your cube watching more toob when you can read, (not for you drivers) have conversations, mess with your computer or go take a walk to lunch with friends? Enough with the video, put down the cellphone and socialize. As for the PSPs (and Nintendo DSes) You can make many friends on a bus/train/carpool with network gaming. Good times and much more entertaining than hunkering down over a TV show, movie or two. The video part is just a sales gimmic, play with your friends. Play with yourself! Um, wait...
This last bit is even further off topic but this reminds me of something along similar lines of thought. Like I said before, I commute almost two hours each way daily by train and I am absolutely amazed at how many people, sitting next to one another will gab the entire trip on their mobiles and yet never even strike up conversation with those around them on the train, day in and day out. We see each other every damn day and at least a forth (or so it seems) manage more than a cursory good morning/evening to our fellow, consistent traveling companions. Weird.</curdmugery>
Re:Give me a break (Score:3, Insightful)
Now my new 5G has a 20 hour battery, four times the capacity, video, album artwork, and charges over USB. It was cheaper than my 2G too.
Clearly I'm deluded into thinking this was a significant difference.
Re:Welcome to Consumerism (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Welcome to Consumerism (Score:2)
Come on, people, leave the anti-"consumerism" crap in the dorm rooms with the other kids where it belongs. Nobody's forcing you to buy a new iPod.
Re:Welcome to Consumerism (Score:2, Insightful)
Who mods up this kind of crap? Bashing America for no reason doesn't make you enlightened or witty, and neither does bashing "capitalist and consumerist society"...which is the same society that produced that computer you're typing o
Re:Give me a break (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Give me a break (Score:3, Insightful)
It's just as ridiculous a statement as your generalization was, after all.
I purchased a 3rd. gen. iPod 40GB when it first came out, and hung onto it until this last Xmas, when I sold it (at a big loss - but so it goes) and got a 60GB iPod video. As you might have guessed, more storage capacity is one of the prime reasons that I'm willing to upgrade
battery (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:battery (Score:2)
Re:battery (Score:3, Informative)
Keep in mind that almost every other portable video player is also significantly heavier and far less pocket friendly. It seems like Apple has been very careful to state that it is an audio player that can play video, because it is an audio player first. A good portable video player makes a very poor portable audio player and vice-versa, because of the opt
and adjustable screen backlight (Score:2)
Scratching the Touch Screen (Score:2)
Re:Scratching the Touch Screen (Score:2)
Re:Scratching the Touch Screen (Score:2)
Touchscreen? (Score:5, Insightful)
But I could get stuff off my DirecTiVo onto it I'd buy it in a heartbeat.
If anyone can make a great portable media player, I trust Apple would be the one to do it.
Or we will just get the MacBook, Mac Mini Solo, and a new gizmo that isn't the iPod.
patents suggest this is true (Score:4, Informative)
Look at the patents in question. US Design Patent No. D504,899 [uspto.gov], filed on May 10, 2005, looks like a patent for the design of an Apple tablet. Yet, perhaps they refrained from calling it a tablet in the patent (they call it "an electronic device") because they actually want it to cover the (much smaller) design of the video iPod. US Patent Application No. 20060026536 [uspto.gov], filed Jan 30, 2005, is called "Gestures for touch sensitive input devices," and the images very clearly show a device that looks like a full-screen ipod with overlayed "touchwheel" (check out this news item for commentary and images [pcmag.com].
What I'm getting at is this: ThinkSecret may very well be right (again!). The fact that these patents were filed shows that they are working on this kind of device. I think these patent applications strongly support the notion that Apple is going to try to release a next-gen device with touch-screen based input. Sounds like a cool device.
Re:patents suggest this is true (Score:5, Insightful)
This new story is probably fake; it's based on the notion that the video iPod isn't the "real" video iPod, which is a very strained argument. Apple has been selling videos at the resolution of the 5G iPod for some time, and the proposed device can't compete with existing portable DVD players for the purpose of watching movies. A bigger screen with the same resolution would increase watchability much less than most people think, and it would be too difficult to hold the device. These facts suggest that Apple is not about to start selling feature films, and further, that Apple is not going to start selling some kind of device massively redesigned for the purpose of video.
If this scoop started showing up in a lot of other places, I'd believe it, but nothing exclusive to ThinkSecret has been true for about six months.
Re:patents suggest this is true (Score:2)
Re:patents suggest this is true (Score:3, Insightful)
History has shown that the images in Apple's utility patent filings rarely bear direct resemblance to the devices they end up in. (And before the trolls come in: Yes this is legal and normal, as the images are only "one embodiment" of the invention being patented.)
"Gestures for touch sensitive input devices", for instance, could easily be interpreted as applying to the existing touchpads in PowerBooks and MacBooks, wh
Mmmm...greasy (Score:2, Funny)
Every time you have a video playing in a window on your monitor, rub your finger across your forehead, then trace a circle on top of the video.
See how long you last without having to clean it.
They should stick with the wheel.
Re:Mmmm...greasy (Score:2, Funny)
Video iPod? (Score:3, Insightful)
Wait, so you mean Apple has bigger plans for the video store on iTunes? Come on, why is this even news? I mean it's a no brainer that Apple wants you to buy videos from them, and if you're buying their videos you must be using their player right?
The Video iPod for the rest of us... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The Video iPod for the rest of us... (Score:2)
ThinkSecret (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah...yippee...this is just the news I wanted!!!! (Score:2)
Now, they're going to get rid of the click wheel, my guess, they'll go widescreen and sideways. Which is what I've always said a video unit should be.
But using the screen, great...now you NEVER get rid of finger-prints. (This will be Apple's big boon-doggle.) Rather, they should have just moved the click-wheel to the backsid
Fingerprints (Score:2, Insightful)
It had better be 16:9 aspect ratio (Score:4, Interesting)
Now, something where the whole face of an iPod sized box was a 16:9 HDTV display would be neat.
Interestingly, flash memory SanDisk [miami.com] is now #2 in MP3 players. There's an advantage in being the biggest maker of flash memory in this business.
Re:It had better be 16:9 aspect ratio (Score:2)
Even if they could make an LCD with that kind of pixel density for less than the cost of your mortgage, you wouldn't be able to percieve the difference from SD at that size anyway.
Hell, HDTV is difficult enough to discern at 28 inches unless you put them side by side.
I hope it is scratchproof... (Score:3, Interesting)
Scratchproof? (Score:4, Insightful)
I hope Apple would use something like this [tdk-europe.com]. Otherwise, the screen will be quickly ruined and make the iPod Nano look indestructible in comparison.
Apple Is Starting a Disturbing Trend (Score:2, Interesting)
i have a feature i prefer (Score:5, Insightful)
name the one thing that a record player, an 8-track player, a tape player, and a CD player can all do, but that an iPod can not. that feature is to not have a half a second of silence between tracks. yes, yes, i know that "the MP3 format isn't easily made to fade one track seamlessly into another track" but i don't care if it's easy, it's obviously *possible*, so that fact that it hasn't been done is a travesty.
look: i listen to albums, not songs; and my favorite album is Tool's "Lateralus"; and until i can go from 'Parabol' to 'Parabola' without a moment of silence inbetween, or (worse) having to fade the last half a second of one track into the first half a second of the next track, i won't buy that damn contraption. so you don't like Tool? maybe you like Queen's "News of the World", where 'We Will Rock You' refuses to match up with 'We Are The Champions'.
bah. is this really a ridiculous thing to request? is it really THAT hard? i mean, i figure there is some kind of input stream for the MP3 data; can't that stream be buffered for two seconds, and when the read-ahead algorithm finds the end of the stream, can't it append the stream for the next MP3? here let me answer my own question: yes, it could.
i'd love to have an ipod that does video, and i'd pay five bills to get one, but if it can't even play music right, what good is it?
end rant.
Re:i have a feature i prefer (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:i have a feature i prefer (Score:3, Insightful)
Shouldn't be an issue (Score:3, Insightful)
There shouldn't even be an issue.
There's no technical reason, given a tiny bit of buffering, why a player can't have the beginning of the next track ready to play the instant the last track ends - especially when the unit has a "fade" feature. Default should be a 0-second "fade", not a gap interrupting the music.
We're paying hundreds of $$$ for gizmos that are entirely capable of uninterrupted playback, yet track transitions are disturbingly discernable silent gaps.
The w
What? (Score:5, Insightful)
While I am all for innovation, there is also a question of blowing the wad too soon.
With every new Apple release there is always going to be a large percentage of customers that get burned. Because Apple is so secretive you can't make a wise decision on purchasing Apple's products. Buy a product at full price one day (Apple rarely discounts), and the next day Apple comes out with something 4 times faster, or more capacity, or more features, or whatever. Anybody buying the so called 5th gen Video iPod will be sour when Apple releases a better version only 6 months later.
This is going to hurt Apple in the long run because they are developing a reputation of being deceptive, not secretive, forcing customers to pay full price for a product that becomes obsolete the next day. At least if Apple practices slowly discouting product until their next release (like the REST of the technology market does), then it wouldn't be so bad when someone bought what was the state of the art iPod one day for $200 and then it is replaced with a new version at $500. Apple frequently releases new better products CHEAPER then the previous generations that we sold only the day before.
If Apple releases a revamped iPod in April, then I think they have lost touch with their customers and reputation for being a considerate company, instead churning out incremental upgrades on a regular basis, screwing early adopter all for the almighty dollar.
Apple has become Microsoft.
If Apple can't wait until next holiday season to hype up a new Video iPod then I will have lost all respect for them.
Re:What? (Score:3, Funny)
Have you been talking to my girlfriend?!
quit whining (Score:5, Insightful)
You sound like a cheapskate fashion elitist who doesn't have a clue as to how the system works.
"What? Saks updates its collection every few months? So I can't buy one outfit today and be able to brag to my friends that I am on top of the fashion world for the next few years? Oh, the horror. I have lost all respect for Saks, that evil inconsiderate Microsoft of a company."
Either accept paying the bill every few months to have the latest fashion, or quit buying fashion in your technology.
What foppery you present us with. Grow up.
Re:What? (Score:4, Informative)
and customers aren't getting "burned". when a new product comes out, your existing one doesn't drop features, doesn't stop working, doesn't become any less useful or enjoyable than it was before the new launch. it's arguably not as "cool", because it's not the latest and greatest thing, but that's more an artifact of being a fashonista who buys technology for bragging rights or to compensate for certain anatomical traits than the actual technology in question.
stop buying technology as fashion.
Re:Is Apple an abusive? (Score:2)
Re:Is Apple an abusive? (Score:5, Insightful)
They're not taking advantage of a monopoly; this has been the case since the Music Store's introduction. As for "abusive monopoly" claims, get back to me when Apple is making deals that punish stores for selling alternatives to iPods, the way Microsoft did with Windows OEMs int he 90s. Consumers can choose any player and any format they want.
This means if you bought music for your iPod
Yes, you can regain your music. Back it up (as iTunes prompts you to) or copy it from the iPod using a third-party utility. Obviously, if you buy music from Apple, it will play on Apple's player. Don't like it? Don't use an iPod or iTunes. You have a choice.
Furthermore, because Fairplay DRM is closed
So don't do it. Just because those are the options doesn't make Apple abusive. Life's tough.
The alternative is DRM free mp3
You don't explain how it's detrimental to the situation or what is so bad about Fairplay DRM to begin with (I forget it's even there, it's so lax in its "restrictions").
Re:Hundreds of dollars in music thrown away? (Score:3, Informative)
Uh, how else will you carry that music around if you don't buy another music player?
Or, eat my investment in all the songs I'd bought. That's ridiculous.
God, you're being idiotic. If your iPod dies, you don't lose your music. Are you even aware of how the iTunes-iPod sync relationship
Re:Is Apple an abusive? (Score:2)
This is a problem how exactly?
Re:Is Apple an abusive? (Score:2)
Re:Is Apple an abusive? (Score:2)
Re:Is Apple an abusive? (Score:2)
It might interest you to know that the U.S. District Court of Norther California does not agree. [ehomeupgrade.com]
Re:Is Apple an abusive? (Score:2)
Microsoft monopolized the market over ITunes since XP came with media player by default. A little unfair advantage.
Wmv and WMA files wont play on linux because most have drm nor can I view them on my Ipod. Its the same thing? To prevent Microsoft from stealing the market we need to support Apple.
Google is coming out but so far it sucks.
Re:Is Apple an abusive? (Score:2)
Re:Is Apple an abusive? (Score:3, Informative)
The technical answer is "no". You can still transport your music to various Apple-blessed devices (like the Motorola ROKR), or to any system that runs iTunes. It doesn't have to be on an iPod.
Of course, you can always burn your iTMS purchased music to a standard a
Re:Is Apple an abusive? (Score:3, Insightful)
Knowing some musicians t
Re:Is Apple an abusive? (Score:3, Informative)
Well, duh. And how fucking difficult is that? Not, is how difficult. Plus, iTMS is very supportive - my brother's (unsigned) band has been on the front-page of the 'Alternative' section and got themselves a plug as single of the week without too much hassle.
As I type, the number one album on the UK iTMS is by Arctic Monkeys, who until recently were still trying to get themselves noticed on MySpace, and then si
Apple marketed it as an iPod with video capability (Score:3, Insightful)
When the video-capable iPod was released, Apple was very clear to position it as the latest and greatest iPod music player, with the added ability to play video. It's an excellent iPod. It plays video very well. If you buy a product and it meets or exceeds your expectations, why should you care if a better version comes out six months later? Welcome to the Computer Age.
Besides, the rumor sites and press pushed it as the "video iPod." Apple never represented video as its primary function. Look at the iPod [apple.com]
Re:Early adopters are the losers here (Score:2)
Also, remember that Apple was clear when they re
Re:i'll stick with my pda (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:tv support (Score:2)
3G phones are wiping the floor with video ipods for a reason - in fact I've yet to see *anyone* viewing video on an ipod, when it's not uncommon for someone to be seen watching the news/football on their phone.
on-demand (Score:2, Interesting)
well, europe is a bit ahead with DVB-H ... but this still follows the paradigm of network (in the sense of tv-station) provided programs. this will work out, and very successfully for DVB-H.
but the point is, that apple is not interested in this market. they enable a "new" concept large-scale: user-selected, on-demand media. and i like it, and won't wait for a show/song/news again. and i don't consume too much of it, but i get what i want, when i want, and pay then. well, i personally couldn't care less ab
So...does your "superseded" Nano still work? (Score:3, Insightful)
My complaint is that if you walk into a shop right now and drop $400 on an ipod, in a couple of months it'll have been superceded.
If you walk into a shop and buy a PS2, PSP, XBOX or any other 'pricey toy', you will get years from it.
Y'know, that's funny, 'cause my 3G iPod, which is 2 1/2 years old now, and (by your logic of counting all iPod lines as the same) probably a dozen generations out of date...and yet, it still works, it still plays all my songs—tell me just how it's been "superseded"?