So until ultra-low-power 1.8" HDs come around (the current ones suck too much juice for a wireless-networked unit, but are okay for a standalone's battery pack), or Flash prices reduce by about 90%, you're stuck, you realize that, right? :)
Of course, by then, you'll have 90GB, and need even more... ;)
I dunno - it seems like a losing game for the foreseeable future, especially as music gives way to increased video capabilities. *shrug*
...and as long as the iPhone doesn't meet my needs/wants, I don't have to buy one.
Don't see how that makes me "stuck". :) Granted, my current MP3 player doesn't have a lot of the features M.'s iPod does, but I rarely have cause to use a standalone player anyhow. Usually I'm tied to a desk, so a PC-based media player gets the job done. (Also, playing MP3s is a tertiary feature for the unit at best, and not why I bought it at all.)
No, what I'm saying is that *no* phone is going to offer you that level of storage, unless one of three things happen:
1) Battery technology takes a sudden leap 2) 1.8HDs drop their power requirements drastically 3) Flash prices drop about 90%
It's not about buying an iPhone or not, it's about insisting on taking everything with you at all times *and* wanting a phone in the same package. Doesn't matter who makes it, it's not likely to happen for quite a while - by which time, if trends continue, your storage needs will have increased as well.
If you're lucky, the crossover point may come in the next five years. :)
If I may ask, what's the reasoning behind taking everything all the time? Lack of good organization tools? Simple psychological comfort? I'm curious.
Mainly, it's the cool factor. Got a buddy who has an iPhone, and it's sweet indeed. Practically, so far every time I've had a chance to get *almost* everything in one package (you'll recall the UMPC discussion we had recently), I've decided I want more power and screen real estate than the convergence device gives me--it was an effort to accept a 12" 1280x800 screen on the new laptop. (But it turns out to do the job pretty nicely.)
Secondarily, it's the camera gear. You should effin' *see* it all piled up and crammed into the backpack, and the next couple of years will likely see me acquire two new bodies and at least two new fast (which means big and heavy) lenses. I can't make glass and battery packs any less heavy or bulky than they are, so the supplemental gear has to shrink if I don't want to leave it behind. The new laptop is a nice compromise between usefulness and fitting in the camera bag, but if I could replace my Flashtrax and cell phone with a single iPod-sized unit, that would make a big difference, not just in the bulk and weight of the devices, but in the support gear (chargers, data cables, card adapters) as well.
There may also be a fillip of wanting everything just to have an excuse *not* to buy one. "Yeah, your iPhone's nice, but talk to me when it does X."
I don't see ever really watching video on an iPod--the screen's just too small. So music is all I should need to store on it, but as you say, music collections tend to grow rather than shrink.
Ah, okay - I was actually wondering if part of the storage need was for offloading shots in the field. That makes perfect sense.
I'm also skeptical of watching video on a 2" (or even 3.5") screen - apparently it's not bad at all, according to many reviews I've seen, but... I dunno.
Now, given that the entire line also does video *out*, that's not too bad. But.
I'm not that sure about the video out either--my understanding (limited though it probably is) is that you can only play video that matches the iPod's screen resolution of 240 lines. Not exactly high-definition.
"Note: Component video output to television is supported by iPod nano (third generation) and iPod classic at 480p or 576p resolution, and by iPod touch at 480i or 576i resolution."
From the component video-out cable page at the Apple Store.
Yeah, seems like it would be more hassle than it's worth to maintain two featuresets; can external playback really be important enough to drive product differentiation?
I think it's more to the point that the Nano/Classic is one platform, and Touch/iPhone is another*. I suspect the codec uberchip in the former is capable of perhaps a bit more than in the latter.
*The Nano and Classic are essentially just flash and HD based versions of the same product now, with the same custom embedded OS, UI, etc, while the Touch and iPhone are OS X based. It's really two distinct product families at this point, being sold under one name. Well, three, with the Shuffle.
Ah. That also makes sense. Wonder if that means we'll see more convergence of platforms downb the road, 'cause if they're going to keep pushing features to down-level platforms, they're going to have to either converge hardware or continue to maintain multiple OS codebases.
Even Microsoft figured that one out, though it took them three full revs of the OS to get it barely functional.
Yeah, right now the Shuffle, Nano, and Classic are the only significant products* Apple sells that aren't running OS X: iPod Touch (ARM), iPhone (ARM), AppleTV (Centrino), iMac, MacBook, MacBook Pro, Mac Pro (all Core 2 Duo), XServe (Xeon) are all running the same OS from the same code.
Not too shabby.
I can't see the Shuffle ever being anything but a custom OS. I mean come on, it's... minimal. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Nano and Classic, or their successor products, moving to OS X on ARM within two years though. God knows the Classic has the space for it. :D
*Airport Extreme and Airport Express, keyboards and mice not included. :)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-05 08:45 pm (UTC)(I really, really want one...)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-05 08:48 pm (UTC)GRRRRRRR!
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-05 11:46 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-06 01:49 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-10 11:18 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 01:28 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 02:53 pm (UTC)Of course, more would be better. :)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 03:25 pm (UTC)Of course, by then, you'll have 90GB, and need even more... ;)
I dunno - it seems like a losing game for the foreseeable future, especially as music gives way to increased video capabilities. *shrug*
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 03:55 pm (UTC)Don't see how that makes me "stuck". :) Granted, my current MP3 player doesn't have a lot of the features M.'s iPod does, but I rarely have cause to use a standalone player anyhow. Usually I'm tied to a desk, so a PC-based media player gets the job done. (Also, playing MP3s is a tertiary feature for the unit at best, and not why I bought it at all.)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 04:03 pm (UTC)1) Battery technology takes a sudden leap
2) 1.8HDs drop their power requirements drastically
3) Flash prices drop about 90%
It's not about buying an iPhone or not, it's about insisting on taking everything with you at all times *and* wanting a phone in the same package. Doesn't matter who makes it, it's not likely to happen for quite a while - by which time, if trends continue, your storage needs will have increased as well.
If you're lucky, the crossover point may come in the next five years. :)
If I may ask, what's the reasoning behind taking everything all the time? Lack of good organization tools? Simple psychological comfort? I'm curious.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 05:16 pm (UTC)Secondarily, it's the camera gear. You should effin' *see* it all piled up and crammed into the backpack, and the next couple of years will likely see me acquire two new bodies and at least two new fast (which means big and heavy) lenses. I can't make glass and battery packs any less heavy or bulky than they are, so the supplemental gear has to shrink if I don't want to leave it behind. The new laptop is a nice compromise between usefulness and fitting in the camera bag, but if I could replace my Flashtrax and cell phone with a single iPod-sized unit, that would make a big difference, not just in the bulk and weight of the devices, but in the support gear (chargers, data cables, card adapters) as well.
There may also be a fillip of wanting everything just to have an excuse *not* to buy one. "Yeah, your iPhone's nice, but talk to me when it does X."
I don't see ever really watching video on an iPod--the screen's just too small. So music is all I should need to store on it, but as you say, music collections tend to grow rather than shrink.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 05:21 pm (UTC)I'm also skeptical of watching video on a 2" (or even 3.5") screen - apparently it's not bad at all, according to many reviews I've seen, but... I dunno.
Now, given that the entire line also does video *out*, that's not too bad. But.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 05:35 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 05:44 pm (UTC)From the component video-out cable page at the Apple Store.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 05:54 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 05:56 pm (UTC)o_O
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 07:12 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 07:17 pm (UTC)*The Nano and Classic are essentially just flash and HD based versions of the same product now, with the same custom embedded OS, UI, etc, while the Touch and iPhone are OS X based. It's really two distinct product families at this point, being sold under one name. Well, three, with the Shuffle.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 07:23 pm (UTC)Even Microsoft figured that one out, though it took them three full revs of the OS to get it barely functional.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 07:29 pm (UTC)Not too shabby.
I can't see the Shuffle ever being anything but a custom OS. I mean come on, it's... minimal. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Nano and Classic, or their successor products, moving to OS X on ARM within two years though. God knows the Classic has the space for it. :D
*Airport Extreme and Airport Express, keyboards and mice not included. :)