digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

The Beat Goes On: Nano, Touch, Beatles, Wireless?

macrumors.com — Now that Apple has invited select media to the a press event which will take place on September 5th, 2007, it seems clear that Apple's iPods will finally see updates. While we typically steer clear of mock-ups of upcoming Apple devices, in the months leading into this event, there have been a num...

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • uburoibob, on 10/10/2007, -9/+23please, please, please me
  • whataboutdave, on 10/10/2007, -3/+24I've been waiting to upgrade my iPod until the Beatles edition. It's been a long, long, long time.
    • sittered, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4I read that second sentence automatically to the tune of "Hard Day's Night."
      • mywhitenoise, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Really? I was thinking "Long, Long, Long"
  • acu8509, on 10/10/2007, -4/+55no fatties
  • gordonf238, on 10/10/2007, -5/+36That nano is ugly as f*ck. Apple would never release something that repulsive.
    • piccols8, on 10/10/2007, -10/+3It's nothing more than the shuffle with a screen, so apparently, they already did.
    • toetagger, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0So the, the Nano's NOT ugly as *****.
    • KnightWhoSaysNi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Agree 100%. SanDisk, Toshiba and Sony would release an mp3 player that ugly, but not Apple.
  • johnhummel, on 10/10/2007, -5/+88All I want:

    Take the iPhone.
    Rip out the phone part.
    Leave in the OS and the Wi-Fi and bluetooth
    Put in a 160GB Drive
    Keep the same OS, maybe a few extras (like wireless streaming from a library, or sharing, but those aren't necessary)
    Thanks for playing

    The tempered glass would be good enough that I wouldn't worry about dropping it. I don't really need the wireless streaming stuff - but you notice that the recent versions of iTunes let you transfer purchased music from your iPod back to your iTunes library, so it's not hard to imagine being able to buy music right off the iPod and transfer it back to your library when you get back home.

    Doing this would also let Apple save money - same OS as the iPhone, same glass, same bluetooth parts, etc - so they don't have to have two separate part lines (save for hard drives and maybe a different back case if they need to hold in the hard drive).

    Either way, we'll see. I've got "fun money" saved in the bank, and my iPod's getting long in the tooth, so it might be time to upgrade.
    • mlvassallo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3With all that and a VOIP application... that would be a great phone
      • johnhummel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Shhh - don't tell AT&T until it's too late....
    • ender42081, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0They should upgrade the bluetooth... iPhone bluetooth on an iPod is idiotic... it doesn't support A2DP or any other stereo-bluetooth-music related functions right now. With any luck the firmware can be upgraded so you can use proper bluetooth headphones on it.
    • fuzzmeister, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I kind of doubt it would have Wi-Fi (makes it too similar to the iPhone), but it is possible.
    • rjcarr, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I see all that possible, and hopefully even probable, except the 160GB drive. How much space do you think the phone electronics take up? I would bet not very much, which doesn't leave much room for storage ... why do you think the iphone only has 8GB max?
      • TheFinaleofSeem, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Thee 160GB hard drives are the same physical size as the current 80GB hard drives in the current iPod line. Ergo, they'd have no trouble fitting.
      • johnhummel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1My theory is that they would make the back plate bigger.

        I wasn't about "rip out the phone stuff" for size purposes, but functionality.
  • TheNik, on 10/10/2007, -22/+14Why, exactly, is the Beatles being released on iTunes that big of a deal?
    • sethworld, on 10/10/2007, -3/+20beause the Beatles are the best
    • plkrtn, on 10/10/2007, -0/+42Because they are the biggest band EVER, and don't have any downloadable songs anywhere at the moment. You obviously don't grasp just how huge the Beatles are.
      Now the British chart includes downloads, the release of any Beatles tracks could end up with the UK Top 40 being dominated by them.
      • markusfarkus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4But why would a real Beatles fan care about downloading their music? Wouldn't they already have everything on vinyl, cassette, and CD (and maybe 8-track)? Are there going to be recordings that have not been previously available exclusively on iTunes?
        • Boondoggle, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10because there are new beatles fans born every day.
        • CongoJoe, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5I agree completely. If you're a fan you probably have the CD's already. If not, what are you waiting for? An inferior sounding downloadable file? Why?
        • JustFender, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0..."everything on vinyl, cassette, cd, maybe 8-track", of course their going to want everything on mp3 to...but obviously they wouldnt rip the cds...
      • shuffle2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1make that: no _legal_ downloadable songs. how many people that already illegally acquired copies of the beatles will rush to pay to download? especially when you consider they most likely already have high quality VBR rips.
    • Myonosken, on 10/10/2007, -12/+2I personally consider them extremely over hyped, but I can still see that it's a huge thing just because of how big they are. People have been wanting to download them for ages- hell I even want a version of I Am A Walrus off itunes.
      • MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Are you the eggman?
      • nateslost, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Over hyped? Only if you don't like genuinely good music. They ARE the reason most of your favorite bands exist.

        You'll never be able to get 'I am a Walrus' on iTunes.

        Its 'I Am the Walrus'

        Thanks for the laugh.
      • fuzzmeister, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You probably think that because you think the extent of the Beatles' catalog is "Yellow Submarine". Do yourself a favor and go listen to "Revolution", "She Said She Said", "Back in the USSR", and "A Day in the Life".
      • Vermifax, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Boy, you're gonna carry that weight a long time....
    • sg7791, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Well, basically they symbolize music rights that are very hard to get. Who knows what's possible after this. Now they only need Led Zeppelin and it will be confirmed that Apple can buy anyone.
    • skoobisnaxs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I think its also because there was a big dispute years ago about who could use the term "Apple Inc." the Beatles had a company called Apple Records (refernce from Yellow Submarine movie with the apple guys I think). When Apple computers decided to make a music store I think there was some animosity and things were said like "the Beatles music will never be available there because they stole their name"

      I think

      But doesnt Michael Jackson own the right to that music anyway?
      • MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9He sold the rights to pay for his nose
    • fuzzmeister, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2The Beatles are the most successful pop band ever. Does that explain it?
    • GeorgeCostanza, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I sympathize with you, I don't see what so great about those old has-beens. Sure, they were chart-toppers back in the day, but i'm pretty surprised as to how many people still give a crap about them nowadays. IMHO, of course.
  • Jeezoflip, on 10/10/2007, -3/+37i just hope its 16:9
  • plkrtn, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12They surely can't be releasing that nano. Its f-ugly. the touch looks a better call, but its just a poor man's iphone, which is a good ipod, but a crappy mobile.
    • mywhitenoise, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Then I will be the happiest poor man with an 'iPhone'.
  • paulgibson, on 10/10/2007, -9/+5I actually like the ipod nano mock-up. If they can get coverflow into it and keep it much the same size (i.e. in terms of width and over all feel) then that would be cool with me.
  • noahhoward, on 10/10/2007, -10/+4Please don't let them put FM in there. It is a useless feature and we'd never hear the end of "ZZZOMG they coppied t3h ZOONE!!"

    FM-HD or whatever it is called may be slightly useful but when you are carrying along thousands of your favorite songs why the hell would you want to listen to some self-important radio jockey talk between every single four month old "NEW" track.
    • velcrocore, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0Dude, here in Portland, we have a "NW only" HD radio station. I can't wait to get an HD radio!
    • chrisgeleven, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Apple sells an FM radio add-on for the iPod for those who truly want it. I doubt they will integrate it, people buy iPod's to listen to THEIR music not to radio stations.
    • Myonosken, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2What's HD radio? Similar to DAB?
      • noahhoward, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I think they just found a way to fit more channels in the same spectrum or they opened up a new spectrum. So far as I know here is no quality difference.
    • streak, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Apple will hold off integrating a broadcast radio receiver in iPods and iPhone until they absolutely must respond to market pressure, because listening to radio undermines the business model behind selling music on iTMS and locking users into iTunes. This shows Apple doesn't truly have a mindset of competing against itself, in spite of what Apple reps might say about the release of new iPods and new iMacs.
  • sakuraz, on 10/10/2007, -2/+40I want a thin iPhone.

    Without the phone.

    With longer battery life.

    Thanks.
    • morphie, on 10/10/2007, -10/+1I want a world free of hunger, war and people whining about battery life.
      • professorChaos, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6shut up
      • noahhoward, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15Pfft. Loser. I want a global war with lasers where people whinge about battery life.
    • fuzzmeister, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2The iPhone already has really good battery life, so if they took out the phone electronics (and the WiFi) and used the same battery, it would have great battery life.
  • TherealObadiah, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2I dunno. The mock-up iPod looks good, but I'm not sure it will enhance any creativity among game programmers. A few tweaks and it could put the final nail in the already moribund PSP. I would enjoy having my iPod capable of playing more than Ms. Pac-man.
    • Chronic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5iPod is not a gaming platform.. its an mp3 player.
  • LoganT, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1I want an iPhone without the phone, with 4,8, and 16 GB flash memory.
    • TherealObadiah, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Yeah, we all want flash-based memory, but 16 GB? Pffft....
  • StoneLox, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1so the new nano comes out sept 5 or all of them do?
    • drgreenberg, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3So there's an event on Sept. 5. That's all anyone knows. If they announce product (likely), said product may be available almost immediately or a date will be announced at that time.
  • bjornkeizers, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1I know I'm going to sound a bit like a fanboy but: I'm really, really looking forward to a new iPod. I've had my 5.5G since release, and while it serves me well... I'd rather have an 'iphone without the phone' to replace it. Bigger screen, coverflow, hoping for a radio+recorder... and of course, at least a 100g capacity.

    I'm hoping for an early release. There's some rumors that the current models are drying up at the retail end. It's very much wishful thinking, but I'd love to see new ipods on shelves come the end of september.
  • Chairboy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9It's an iPod with bluetooth, and it can be paired with the iPhone to provide access to a big music library by streaming it wirelessly to the phone.

    This way, people have a reason to buy an iPod even if they already have an iPhone.

    It's part of a long term strategy to re-position the ipod as the new Personal Network Device. Future Personal Network Devices would include an Apple branded GPS for providing positioning data to the iPhone, a battery powered wireless iSight that clips to your collar so you can casually record video, etc.

    The brilliant part of it, they can sell the individual devices as they come out, then re-sell them to the same people a year later as combo devices that take those things and put them into a unified pod. This way, an iPhone buyer isn't "lost" to Apple as an equipment purchaser for the duration of the iPhone's life, instead, they continue to buy electronics that complement the iPhone, because they "gotta catch 'em all".
    • joegibes, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Would be a nice move by Apple. Plus, allowing bluetooth headsets (and speakers) would work well (or using the new iPod as a bluetooth speaker if it has one).
    • Jawsh91, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1My theory is that in like 5-6 years, there will just be an iPhone and no iPod. When the first iPod came out it had 5 gigs of memory, similar to the iPhone, in 5-6 years the iPhone theoretically will be able to hold 100 gigs like the current iPods. Also, any guy (we don't have purses) with an iPod and phone can tell you how annoying it is to have your cellphone AND iPod in your pockets.

      Now I just have to wait 5-6 years.
  • joepix, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3College students get a $150 rebate on Ipods thru Sep 18. I wonder if this will include the new Ipods intro'd on Sep 5. I was going to take advantage of that deal today. Wonder if I should wait a few days?
    • zioxide, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6it wont apply to the new ones. last year they released nanos with a week to go in the promo and it didnt apply.
    • joepix, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Hmmm. But will the current nano's price drop when the new one's come out? Anybody remember what happened last year?
    • b-dizzle, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Might as well wait and see...
  • djspike, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11I'd rather have a WiFi enabled iPod than a touch-screen... I wanna download stuff over the air to my iPod and then sync it to my iTunes over WiFi. Thankfully these will be out BEFORE my birthday. w00t.
  • jhuebel, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4The few features mentioned in the title likely rank in probability thusly:

    1. Touch
    2. Nano
    3. Wireless (bluetooth)
    4. Beatles
    99. Wireless (802.11x)

    I rank the Nano lower than touchscreen capability, simply because gizmodo reported on it and that (in my mind) causes the idea to lose some credibility. The nano was refreshed fairly recently, so I think it's more like that the video iPod is what will get the new features. I also think Bluetooth and Beatles music rank pretty closely together. The iPhone doesn't even have stereo bluetooth, so I find it unlikely that they would release an iPod based on a similar implementation.

    Honestly, I don't see Beatles music being a big selling point. There have been plenty of other places to get their music besides iTunes, legal or otherwise.
  • humfern, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Can you imagine if the new iPod can just sync wirelessly to my iTunes!!!! I Will buy one asap!

    I use my 5.5G 80GB iPod on my car almost all the time. When I add new music or podcast to my iTunes library I have to go out to my car (that sits 6 meters from my office at home), grab the iPod, walk again to the office, connect it to the base at my desk, wait to sync and when I leave my office remember to bring the iPod with me to connect it again in my car (I always forget to bring it btw). With WiFi built in and the ability to sync that way it will be a great benefit for us iPod in car users.
    • Burritoking924, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Well someones a lazy SOB.
      • humfern, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0I knew someone will make such a dumb comment... (you won the prize!) DF..
    • fuzzmeister, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1WiFi syncing would be slow as *****. Trust me, you don't want it (unless you only sync a few songs at a time).
    • ChzPlz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Where do you live? I want to break into your car.
  • sg7791, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Of course the Beatles are coming to iTunes. I don't remember if it was WWDC or Macworld, but Jobs actually used Sgt. Pepper as demo music for the iPhone. Also, John, Paul and Ringo's albums were released recently on iTunes. Something's definitely up.

    Also, I doubt a "touch iPod" would have wifi. Apple tries to keep products in the same price range as their predecessors.
    • ZPWeeks, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It wouldn't be the first time they sold a $500 iPod.... or the second....
      As long as they have a lower model at a price equivalent to a current model (i.e. one with less storage, or no wireless or something) at the $300-400 range, they'll be fine introducing a model at $500. Once they produce enough, prices will go down again anyways.
  • shadowmoses, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1iPod without the phone+camera with 8,16 and 32gb options, also the option to have Nike+ Built in.
    • johnpaul191, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2yeah, because that touch screen device would do well for people that actually sweat when they exercise.
  • Kyderdog, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Apple is now Carrying the full line of Sonny & Cher Music:

    ARTIST: Sonny and Cher
    TITLE: The Beat Goes On

    {Refrain}
    The beat goes on, the beat goes on
    Drums keep pounding a rhythm to the brain
    La de da de dee, la de da de da

    Charleston was once the rage, uh huh
    History has turned the page, uh huh
    The miniskirt's the current thing, uh huh
    Teeny bopper is our newborn king, uh huh

    {Refrain}

    The grocery store's the supermart, uh huh.
    Little girls still break their hearts, uh huh.
    And men still keep on marching off to war
    Electrically they keep a baseball score

    {Refrain}

    Grandmas sit in chairs and reminisce
    Boys keep chasing girls to get a kiss
    The cars keep going faster all the time
    Bums still cry, "Hey buddy, have you got a dime"

    {Refrain}

    And the beat goes on, yes the beat goes on...
  • xoineg, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2Beatles? is that a that old car design from Volkswagen?
  • brandontober, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I think It's pretty obvious that the nano will stay the same size. People use it for running and stuff like the Nike+. The fat squatty iPod will replace the 30 and 80 gig models and the 'touch iPods' will be released as an entirely new line.
  • Rethcir, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1I really don't see the point of touchscreen or MacOS or cover flow in a regular consumer iphone. I'd rather use that power consumption for longer battery life on the current embedded system. I think adding MacOS to a consumer grade piece of electronics is like renting a jackhammer to put a nail in the wall to hang a picture.

    And I still think physical buttons are needed. Particularly the "next song" button which I go to all the time when i'm on the train.
  • johnpaul191, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1if this is just about the Beatles music on iTMS, i will be so let down. is it that big a deal that one band has been a bunch of luddites all these years, and then eventually came around to accept modern technology?
    anyone that is that big of a Beatles fan probably owns the music, nobody else cares at this point.
  • pixelbeat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Anyone has a price range speculation?
    • explodingtree, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2One miiiiieeeeelllliiiiooon dollars.
    • explodingtree, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2One miiiiieeeeelllliiiiooon dollars.
  • DFENS, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Whatever it is, you'll have to sign a 2 year contract to not use any other mp3 players. :)
  • fragile00, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1touch+ osx+ wi-fi= 'le sex
  • edjenkins234, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Am i the only one who likes to be able to use my ipod without looking at the screen?
    Anyone remember the ipods awhile back with those annoying ass touch buttons?
    Im all for an ipod update but I really dont want a big iphone thing, if you guys want that then buy an iphone and unlock it and let us MUSIC listeners keep the best music device ever created.
  • Vermifax, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I just want Logic Pro 8.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.