|
|
New iPods arrive
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status:
Offline
|
|
Well actually, the new models haven't been released yet. But in anticipation of the update, the old models have just been heavily discounted. The Apple iPod Store now has these offers
8GB iPod nano $149 $129
16GB iPod nano $199 $149
120GB iPod Classic $249 $229
8GB iPod touch $229 $189
16GB iPod touch $299 $249
32GB iPod touch $399 $279
The iPod shuffle remains unchanged. The largest discount is 30% on the 32 GB touch. For comparison, the 16GB Zune HD is supposed to cost $229.
|
•
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status:
Offline
|
|
Current generation refurbs have become cheaper too.
Refurb 8GB iPod nano $99
Refurb 16GB iPod nano $129
Refurb 120GB iPod classic $199
Refurb 8GB iPod touch $149
Refurb 16GB iPod touch $199
Refurb 32GB iPod touch $249
Refurbished iPod - Apple Store
|
•
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Colorado
Status:
Offline
|
|
How do you know the new models won't be priced at those points? *hint hint*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by imitchellg5
How do you know the new models won't be priced at those points? *hint hint*
Almost, but not quite.
New 8GB iPod touch $199
New 32GB iPod touch $299
New 64GB iPod touch $399
New 160GB iPod classic $249
|
•
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Northern Ireland
Status:
Offline
|
|
iTunes Store
^ direct link to iTunes download of iTunes 9 with features list. Unfortunately the link still goes to 8.2.1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by kylef
iTunes Store
^ direct link to iTunes download of iTunes 9 with features list. Unfortunately the link still goes to 8.2.1.
It's available now, as well as iPone OS 3.1.
-t
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
iPhone 3.1 download is really slooooooooow....
The iTunes 9 download is humming along nicely though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status:
Offline
|
|
Both are slow as heck.
iTunes downloads at 27KB/sec. *yawn*
-t
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status:
Offline
|
|
These look like impressive iPod price points.
|
"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Down by the river
Status:
Offline
|
|
I was hoping for GPS in new iPod Touch...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status:
Offline
|
|
Reasonable prices for flash memory upgrades? Holy ****!
12-150% markup over spot component prices instead of 650% is a huge shift.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by cgc
I was hoping for GPS in new iPod Touch...
And many others for a camera...
It appears the touch is really intended to be just an iPod with games. Period.
|
•
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status:
Offline
|
|
Or a super portable computer, as they said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status:
Offline
|
|
Meh. Not really convincing.
|
•
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'm less convinced by you.
It's very handy to keep around the house when you don't feel like hauling your laptop into wherever you are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status:
Offline
|
|
Okay, wait a second, the nano got a camera but the high-end iPod, the touch did not?
Say what?
Maybe Apple feared too much product blurring between the touch and the iPhone if the touch were to get a camera.
(
Last edited by Big Mac; Sep 9, 2009 at 05:01 PM.
)
|
"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by turtle777
Both are slow as heck.
iTunes downloads at 27KB/sec. *yawn*
-t
I got it at 250KB/sec.
Why the hell does iTunes have to re-determine gapless playback information for the entire library after each second upgrade?
****ing drag if you've got a 450+GB library sitting on a network drive...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
Yeah that was a bit of a shocker for me. I thought they would put the camera in the Touch - not the Nano.
And what camera does the Nano have - is it the same one as in the iphone 3gs?
|
"Mac Daddy" - 15" MBP, 2.2 GHz Core i7, 8GB, 750GB HDD
"Mommy Mac" - 13" Macbook, 2.4GHz C2D, 2GB, 160GB
"Baby Mac" - 15" PB, 1.5GHz, 1.5GB, 80GB
64GB iPod Touch (4th gen)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Colorado
Status:
Offline
|
|
Well I had planned on getting the new touch with a camera. But alas it was not to be. Too bad I already gave away my old touch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by spiff72
And what camera does the Nano have - is it the same one as in the iphone 3gs?
Nope.
The iPhone 3GS has a 3 MP camera.
The new iPod nano has a 0.3 MP camera.
|
•
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status:
Offline
|
|
The nano's camera is so crummy they don't even let it take stills.
Originally Posted by turtle777
Both are slow as heck.
iTunes downloads at 27KB/sec. *yawn*
2MBps here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by mduell
The nano's camera is so crummy they don't even let it take stills.
That's completely irrelevant though, if it's "good enough" for casual video, and geez - take a look at the interface:
http://gizmodo.com/5355774/hands-on-...-is-smooooooth
That's just gorgeous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status:
Offline
|
|
Yeah, video is obviously what it's intended for. Great Apple-style implementation.
(
Last edited by Simon; Sep 9, 2009 at 05:44 PM.
)
|
•
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2008
Status:
Offline
|
|
Very disappointed that the iPod Touch has no camera! Sold my 16gb 2g Touch to buy a new one with camera! Darn it! Low end 8gb model also did NOT get processor upgrade as the 32gb & 64gb models did.. Still read online today, that they will eventually have a Touch with camera.. When?? Curse word Curse word.. LOL...
Overall.. very disappointed!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status:
Offline
|
|
Q&A with NYT's David Pogue
I asked him, first of all, what the blogosphere’s been buzzing about : why Apple put a video camera into the tiny iPod Nano—and not the iPod Touch.
Mr. Jobs reiterated what Phil Schiller, the marketing vice president, had said earlier in the onstage presentation: that Apple is really pitching the iPod Touch as a game machine these days. And to do that, you have to make it as inexpensive as possible.
“Originally, we weren’t exactly sure how to market the Touch. Was it an iPhone without the phone? Was it a pocket computer? What happened was, what customers told us was, they started to see it as a game machine,” he said. “We started to market it that way, and it just took off. And now what we really see is it’s the lowest-cost way to the App Store, and that’s the big draw. So what we were focused on is just reducing the price to $199. We don’t need to add new stuff. We need to get the price down where everyone can afford it.”
I also asked him why the Nano can record video, but can’t snap still photos.
That reason, he said, is technical: the sensors you need to record video are extremely thin these days—thin enough to fit into the wafer-thin Nano. But the ones with enough resolution for stills, especially with autofocus (like the sensor in the iPhone), are much too thick to cram into a player that’s only .02 inches thick.
|
•
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Netherlands
Status:
Offline
|
|
Firmware 3.1.1 killed my home button but even more: no volume controls (slider) anymore on a 1G Touch! In case anyone can confirm this I would not recommend this update.
|
I'm-a trying to wonder, wonder, wonder why you, wonder, wonder why you act so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2008
Status:
Offline
|
|
I saw the Pogue interview also..
Simon said: (Quoting Jobs)..:
".02 inches thick."
2 100th's of an inch thick?? HUH???
A typo I assume
ALSO - My feeling as to why they didn't upgrade the touch to have a camera:
The 2G touch was just re-engineered a year ago to the 2g with shiny chrome back.
Possibly then, adding a camera would require a total re-engineering to put in the iPhone 3Gs Camera in it,
thus making the 3G touch thicker to handle the camera/sensor..??
It still sucks that they didn't put in the camera...
(
Last edited by sartor; Sep 10, 2009 at 09:44 AM.
Reason: ipod touch speculation - 2g-3g size factor/camera)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by sartor
Very disappointed that the iPod Touch has no camera! Sold my 16gb 2g Touch to buy a new one with camera! Darn it! Low end 8gb model also did NOT get processor upgrade as the 32gb & 64gb models did.. Still read online today, that they will eventually have a Touch with camera.. When?? Curse word Curse word.. LOL...
Overall.. very disappointed!
You sold your iPod based on a rumor?
Steve
|
Celebrating 10 years and 4000 posts on MacNN!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by sartor
".02 inches thick."
2 100th's of an inch thick?? HUH???
A typo I assume
My guess as well.
They probably meant to write 0.2" (instead of 0.02"). That's fairly realistic considering the width of nano case towards the tapered edges (it's 0.24" at the center).
|
•
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by mduell
2MBps here.
You obviously didn't start downloading the minute it became available.
I checked, it wasn't available. I checked again a couple of minutes later, and there it was. Then all download hell broke loose. I guess after a couple of hours, the heavy load subsided.
-t
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2008
Status:
Offline
|
|
yes, maybe not the smartest thing to do, but it seemed such a strong rumor.. :-(
my bad for sure! DOH!
I may just look to the nearby University to see if I can get a good deal on a 8gb touch to tide me over...
the students there got them free with laptop purchases.. and may not want them. A friend did just that,
and got a pretty good deal..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ibook_steve
You sold your iPod based on a rumor?
Steve
I've heard of people selling their computers based on a rumor. I agree it's weird. But then I usually buy the new computer/iPod before giving mine up.
|
Mac Pro Dual 3.0 Dual-Core
MacBook Pro
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
Can anybody answer to me the difference between the 2nd generation 8GB and the 3rd generation 8GB? I want to pick up a touch but if there's no difference between the 2nd and 3rd I'll just grab the 16GB 2G.
TIA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Colorado
Status:
Offline
|
|
The current 8GB is the 2nd gen...only 32GB and 64GB are actually 3G.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status:
Offline
|
|
At first, that's what I thought too. But then I noticed the 8GB now has 30h battery life. IIRC Apple used to give a 36h figure for battery life on the 8GB model.
Are the model numbers actually identical?
|
•
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Simon
Are the model numbers actually identical?
They're not, but that doesn't say anything about the hardware, since the new ones come with 3.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
•
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Colorado
Status:
Offline
|
|
Hmm well they do seem to have different model numbers... So weird.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status:
Offline
|
|
I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere in here, but if you haven't upgraded your Touch from 2.x yet, it now costs only $5 in the US.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Colorado
Status:
Offline
|
|
So I went to get a new 32GB touch which the Apple Store says they have in stock. Only mine didn't. Kinda not happy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|