October 27, 2004

• I heard it doesn't directly take the popular DSC media, things have to be done through itune. Can it suck things from the camera? From a photography standpoint, doesn't look too exciting...
• From the owner of an ipod and a digital camer this doesn't look too exciting. I don't really see the point. I mean, sure, it replaces the photos in the wallet, but ditigal photos are so fexible, print 'em, email 'em, burn 'em to a cd. I don't see myself buying this upgrade.
• A recording iPod. At the very least, a non-recording one with built-in radio tuner. Or, if you want some fancy stuff, a video-playback capable one. That's what I'd love to buy. Watch my entire music video collection during commute, in waiting rooms, or to jumpstart some conversation during my lunch hour... But... photos? My small camera can show those in its diminute LCD, or in any video monitor with a cable. Disc covers? Don't think so. Than again, I'm a luddite, so...
• iPod Blue! (but cool) Rechargeable batteries have a limited number of charge cycles and may eventually need to be replaced. Battery life and the number of charge cycles vary by use and settings. See www.apple.com/batteries for more information.
• No, you can't get them directly from the camera without an adapter, such as the Belkin Digital Media Reader. The advantages of the new device are: 1) up to 60 GB storage; 2) Color Screen; 3) More battery life (15 hours base vs 8 hours base); 4) Able to display images on TVs and such without another device. If you, for example, make a lot of presentations, then you could store all your slides on the iPod, then hook it to a television or projector directly, rather than lugging around a laptop, for example. Of course, any other type of slide show is a possibility as well. I'm not saying these are all reasons for you to get the new iPod, but those are the basic advantages.
• i really want to like the black/red U2 version . . do I?
• what's with the battery replacement anyway - it seems to indicate that if you send it in for battery replacement you get a different iPod back . . that would certainly piss of the U2 version owners, wou'nnit?
• I think the U2 edition is hideous, and, as another iPod/digicam owner there really isn't much point. I'm not even taken by the extended battery life or extra space, since mine is more than adequate. /hugs it tight
• I think the u2 one is pretty cool looking, but its only 20 gigs! If I'm paying more, I expect to get the largest size they make. I mean sure, you get tons of u2 music, but I don't really see many people who have never bought a U2 album buying it. I wish hp had relased the blue ipod they showed off instead of the exact same one as apple already has (and for the same price)
• There's a group of people that will buy anything Apple tells them to. In several colours. That's who this is marketed to, I think. I don't want to have to lean over some hipster's shoulder to look at his 25,000 photos just because he's an aquaintance. Thoughtful consumers want USEFUL features, Apple. A built-in bottle opener would be sweeter than this.
• This person works for Apple's advertising agency. I just thought I would mention that.
• The perfect gift for iPod-owning MoFites. Single-cylinder, though.
• mmMmMm.. u2 flavored pepsi blue.
• I just don't see people taking their photos with them everywhere the way they do with music. There is entertainment value in music, and it's something you do passively, whereas looking at photos is much more active, and personal. Besides, it's far easier to look at the photos on laptop or desktop. A screen that size doesn't seem to be worth the trouble or price. I think Apple missed a big opportunity as well, with the color screen- why can't the iPod display visuals to go with the music? Something new and everchanging would seem to be a far more interesting use for the display than static album art. I just don't see the photo iPod being a hit. The price is too high, and the feature bloat is unnecessary- kind of like MS Word after version 5... Just my 2¢. And, between the new iPods and the new countries for the music store, is it just me, or were these the worst kept secrets in Apple product introduction history?
• Blimpchimp: but your ignoring dt118's long prestigious posting record here (I know, this coming from someone here for a week, but still... uh... yeah...) I also question the logic of this - I mean it's nice in the sense that the internet fridge is nice, but it's really filling a need I don't think most people have, which is portable photo viewing on a small screen. Plus it doesn't use the Chicago font, which was half the reason I bought my iPod. I don't think it will do well, but as always in situations like this, I'll probably end up dead wrong because of some very obvious reason I'm ignoring.
• Is it shoesworld all over again?
• I forgot about how all our posting histories were erased - but I didn't recognize the username
• Blimpchimp - sorry, I meant it sarcastically (I was agreeing with you), since he had no posting history. And I didn't know the histories were erased, either. So I feel like a total jackass over here, apologize to all involved, and retire from this thread in shame.
• If it's true, then he's not much good at astroturfing, since the response seems to be an overwhelming "whatever".
• Hmm, as an avid iPod user, this gets a big ho-hum from me. Inflated price, tiny screen and no avi-movie playback ability. I expected more from Apple than this.