Apple Keynote: It's Showtime

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/12/live-from-the-steve-jobs-keynote-its-showtime/' target='_blank'>http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/12/live-from-the-steve-jobs-keynote-its-showtime/</a><br /><br /></div><img src="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/engadget-apple-keynote-2006.jpg" /><br /><br />The fine folks over at Engadget are doing some kick-ass near-realtime blogging on the Apple keynote that's happening today, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/12/live-from-the-steve-jobs-keynote-its-showtime/">so head on over to check it out</a>. Here are the highlights:<br /><br /><li> The full-sized iPod will now do 6.5 hours of video<br /><li> New headphones, improved sound, will come standard on all iPods<br /><li> Gapless playback (important for the hardcore audio folks)<br /><li> Instant search allows you to filter through your collection faster<br /><li> Gaming has been added (PAc-Man, Zuma, Texas Hold 'Em, Mini Golf, others), being sold for $4.99 each via iTunes<br /><li> Lower prices: $249 USD for the 30 GB iPod, $349 for the 80 GB iPod<br /><li> The Nano will come in 2GB for $149, 4GB for $199, and 8GB for $249<br /><li> 24 hour battery life is a new feature on the Nano, which will also come in Blue, Pink, Green, Silver and Black<br /><li> A 40% smaller charger for iPods<br /><li> The new iPod Shuffle looks insanely small and will sell for $79 in 1 GB size<br /><li> iTunes video will now be sold at 640 x 480 resolution<br /><li> iTunes 7 has an improved layout, an album view that's very Windows Media Player 11-esque, auto cover art downloading<br /><li> 75+ movies are available from Disney, Pixar, Touchstone, and Miramax. Not very impressive - all are Disney-owned studios. Prices on new movies are $12.99 USD for the pre-orders and first week, no mention of the price after that point. Likely $14.99. Older movies will cost $9.99.<br /><li> iTunes movies will be internationally offered in 2007<br /><li> iTV is how you get your media onto your TV. Looks like a flatter Mac Mini. Built-in power adaptor, no brick. HDMI output, component video output.<br /><li> iTV has a 10 foot view - it's basically Frontrow<br /><li> Pricing is $299 and coming in Q1 2007 (missing the Christmas season? surprising!)<br /><br />All in all, this is a lot of impressive news to absorb. The new iPods are have some decent new features, though nothing mind-blowing. Still, 80 GB and 6.5 hours of video with a brighter screen makes for an impressive iPod. The iTunes video store is a yawner - there's no mention of burning to DVD, but I doubt it will be possible. The movie selection isn't very impressive - you can tell the other big studios don't want to cooperate with Apple (yet). iTV is the most impressive thing, because it's something that no vendor has executed on with any degree of competence.<br /><br /><b>UPDATE:</b> So it looks like Jeremy and I were both working on an Apple keynote post, neither one of us telling the other. ;-) Consider it two opinions on the same subject then...

[Jason Dunn]

http://www.apple.com/ipodnano/ads/

Why have I NEVER seen an ad that kick-ass for any player other than the iPod? Is there only one talented, creative ad agency on the planet, and they work for Apple? :roll:

[Damion Chaplin]

I'm sorry, but $249 for 8GB? Talk about drinking the Kool-Aid. I paid less than $249 for my 20GB Archos TWO YEARS AGO! And it still has more functionality than the iPod.

I think the phrase ought to be officially changed to "There's an iPod owner born every minute." :?

[Jason Dunn]

I'm sorry, but $249 for 8GB? Talk about drinking the Kool-Aid. I paid less than $249 for my 20GB Archos TWO YEARS AGO! And it still has more functionality than the iPod.

Well now, hold on, to be fair we have to acknowledge that the $249 is for 8 GB of Flash storage. I somehow doubt your 20GB Archos is that thin, light, or gets that same level of playback from the battery. ;-) The $249 for the 30 GB iPod would be a more fair comparison...

(wait, did I just defend Apple?) 8O :lol:

[Tim Williamson]

I'm not even close to an Apple fanboy, but I've used my iPod Nano nearly every day since I got it. I mainly bought it for the capacity and the size and I guess I'm paying a premium for the Apple name. This 2nd gen Nano isn't a huge upgrade, but I think it'll be worth it to have the extra storage space and better battery life in a case that doesn't scratch as easy. I put a hold on one to pick-up tonight. :)

[Jason Eaton]

&lt;bring bring>

"...hello?... oh hi lucifer... no you can't borrow the snowblower, you haven't returned that blender I lent you."

[Darius Wey]

Okay, my two cents.

The storage upgrades of both the iPod and the iPod nano are nice, and they're not too badly priced either. The games support in the 5G/6G (5.5G?) iPod is cool (perhaps a short-lived novelty), but with all this talk of Live Anywhere making its way into Windows Mobile devices and perhaps even the Zune, it makes sense to have some sort of competitve offering.

New ways to search, new gapless playback. Very nice. 'Nuff said.

On to design. I was never a fan of the iPod mini design, and the iPod nano now looks like an iPod mini pancake. Same old story, but thinner. IMHO, the 1G nano looks more appealing, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder, eh? ;) The aluminium casing is a nice touch, and will probably help reduce the number of scratches.

Now, iTunes 7. Good, bad, and whatever happened to Apple's WWDC "Redmond, start your photocopiers" campaign? Echoing Jason's thoughts, the album view is almost a clone of Windows Media Player 11. 8O Cover Flow view is a nice, geek-appealing touch, but be sure to have high-resolution album art, or it'll look like trash (at least iTunes is now offering free album art for music in your library).

An interesting addition to the iTunes library: Album Artist. Those of you very familiar with Windows Media Player will know what it's all about. Previously, I had issues sorting media in iTunes, since I'd have an album with guest artists, a single Album Artist tag, yet iTunes wouldn't recognise the latter and thus jumble everything up. That's all changed. iTunes 7 now recognises the Album Artist tag embedded in the file, but it has a bug. It appears in the Get Info box, but it doesn't appear in the library. You have to launch the Get Info box of every track to "refresh" the track's status in the library before the contents of the Album Artist tag will appear. That, my friends, is a real pain in the ass.

Update: Or the quicker solution, which I just discovered. You can nuke your entire library and the relevant ITL and XML files in the iTunes folder, and then re-add your music. Sigh.

[ctmagnus]

So I can get the album art for all my music, by upgrading to iTunes 7?

Anyways, it's a good thing I didn't upgrade to the latest 6.x version last night, like I had planned to.

[Darius Wey]

So I can get the album art for all my music, by upgrading to iTunes 7?

Yes. You need an iTunes account, though.

[Tim Williamson]

Here are some pics I took of the 8GB Nano...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/t-will/sets/72157594282174261/

[Tim Williamson]

One thing I haven't heard mentioned is that the middle button is slightly concave, so it's easy to tell your finger directly in the middle.

[Tim Williamson]

I've run into a bug in iTunes 7 with the 8GB Nano...

I use iTunes to manually manage my music, when I drag and drop my MP3 files from Windows Explorer onto the iPod file list in iTunes, it looks like it's copying the music (the free space decreases), but when it's done copying the free space increases and the files aren't on the iPod.

The only workaround is that I have to drop the files directly on the iPod icon in the devices list on the left. Anyone else have this problem?

[Darius Wey]

So I can get the album art for all my music, by upgrading to iTunes 7?

Yes. You need an iTunes account, though.

Interestingly, if it doesn't get the art the first time, try again - and again - and again. I think each fetch operation cycles through a single store, so if one store doesn't have it, it'll look at another store. I'm not 100% sure about that, but that's what it appears to do.

[Darius Wey]

Here are some pics I took of the 8GB Nano...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/t-will/sets/72157594282174261/

No fingerprints. Finally. ;)

[Tim Williamson]

Here are some pics I took of the 8GB Nano...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/t-will/sets/72157594282174261/

No fingerprints. Finally. ;)

Haha, yeah, believe it or not, I actually spent a little time cleaning the 1G Nano for the photoshoot...but it doesn't clean up very well... :)

[Damion Chaplin]

Well now, hold on, to be fair we have to acknowledge that the $249 is for 8 GB of Flash storage. I somehow doubt your 20GB Archos is that thin, light, or gets that same level of playback from the battery. ;-) The $249 for the 30 GB iPod would be a more fair comparison...

OK, you're right. Apples to apples and all that. :wink: The 30GB iPod and my Archos are in fact a better comparison.
Forget Archos for a minute though. I still question the price. Doesn't it confuse potential customers that Apple has two entirely different players for the same price? Here's this cool 8GB Nano, but right next to it is a different iPod that's only a little over twice the size, but plays videos (and a million other things) and has almost 4 times the capacity for the same price?

I just don't understand the mentality behind losing functionality to save a few square centimeters. :?

[Dyvim]

I just don't understand the mentality behind losing functionality to save a few square centimeters. :?

Right now, thin is in - just look at RAZR phones, Motorola Q, etc.

But in this case it's not just the dimensions. The nano comes in at less than 1/3 the weight of the 30 GB hard disk version and it has no moving parts so is great for working out. To me the nano is truly wearable for a vigorous workout - the full-size iPods are just heavy enough that it'll bug me flopping around, but the nano is light enough that I scarcely notice it.

I have both a nano and a full-sized (4G) iPod- the nano is my DAP on the go, and the full-sized one is the center of my home entertainment system (with as much lossless music as I can fit into 60 GB). If I need video on the go, I'll leave my iPod at home and take my PPC and watch VGA resolution Divx videos on a 4" screen via TCPMP.

[xycury]

The Shuffle is really neat.

seriously loathe apple and everything related but the Shuffle is something that can work for me.

I don't need to know what's playing, likewise it would not be on my player plus the simple controls and the clip too.

but sadly i would not use itunes. Simply detest that software.

The GF better not see this, or she'll be buying it. I guess maybe she'll give me a the Dell Diddy :lol:

[kiwi]

(wait, did I just defend Apple?) 8O :lol:

omg!! I thought I was reading things when I saw that! lol!

heh heh.. still a bit annoyed that the ipod still does not have a user adjustable equalizer other than "presets" and radio tuner built in.

Oh well..

ITunes 7 looks good.. though the new "download coverart" function is only to download the cover to the database right.. I dont think they embed cover art into the MP3 files themselves ? correct?

B

[Damion Chaplin]

But in this case it's not just the dimensions. The nano comes in at less than 1/3 the weight of the 30 GB hard disk version and it has no moving parts so is great for working out. To me the nano is truly wearable for a vigorous workout - the full-size iPods are just heavy enough that it'll bug me flopping around, but the nano is light enough that I scarcely notice it.

Does anyone else remember the 80s? Remember when we all excercised wearing those giant yellow Sony walkmans? We were somehow just fine working out with them. Then CD players came along and they were even bigger. Even the Sony sport radio (the smallest portable music player available at the time) was larger than the current HD-based iPod.

By the way, not once would we have even considered paying $250 for any of these devices, no matter how small they got.

So saying you'd gladly pay more for less functionality because it's smaller and lighter just doesn't hold water for me. Thin may be in, but I still don't get it...

[Darius Wey]

ITunes 7 looks good.. though the new "download coverart" function is only to download the cover to the database right.. I dont think they embed cover art into the MP3 files themselves ? correct?

Yes, I think that's the case. Manual way around it is to have iTunes download the art, drag the art to the desktop, then do a batch embed using the Get Info command.

[Tim Williamson]

I still can't believe the iTunes doesn't monitor your music folders! When I rip new music I would need to manually add it to iTunes. Winamp and WMP have had this "watch folder" functionality for a while, and until iTunes adds it I wouldn't consider using it as my main player.

[Dyvim]

Does anyone else remember the 80s? Remember when we all excercised wearing those giant yellow Sony walkmans? We were somehow just fine working out with them. Then CD players came along and they were even bigger.

Heh, heh. Not just the 80's. I bought a Sony Discman in 2002 and used that until 2004 when I finally switched to digital music. I could run or power walk with it but would have to hold it in the palm of my hand with the handstrap. That thing was heavy. Consumer music choices have come a long way since then. Now I can carry a lossy version of my entire CD library (maybe 400 discs) with me at all times (using an HD DAP). Now I just want storage capacities to increase enough that I can carry a lossless version of my entire CD library around with me at all times (I know, I know - not at all necessary but it would be nice).

[Damion Chaplin]

Now I just want storage capacities to increase enough that I can carry a lossless version of my entire CD library around with me at all times (I know, I know - not at all necessary but it would be nice).

I'm right there with you. Unfortunately, when I did my lossless article (http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/articles.php?action=expand,10552), I estimated my entire collection would be over 300GB in WMA lossless. It'll probably be a while till I can get a 300GB DAP. :wink:

Also, I'm not so enthusiastic about carrying lossless files unless the DAP has some sort of digital output. As I've noted before, outputting using the headphone jack will introduce enough line noise to make carrying lossless files pointless. :?

[Dyvim]

I estimated my entire collection would be over 300GB in WMA lossless. It'll probably be a while till I can get a 300GB DAP. :wink:

My lossy collection (192 kbps VBR MP3 and AAC) weighs in around 25 GB. I've converted everything except my classical music (~50 discs, trying to find the time - I know, I know, I should have done the classical in lossless first not last) and it's at 115 GB. 120 GB DAPs might arrive in the not too distant future (I read that there is a 120 GB 1.8" drive - the same size as used in current full-sized iPods), but even that won't be enough.

Also, I'm not so enthusiastic about carrying lossless files unless the DAP has some sort of digital output. As I've noted before, outputting using the headphone jack will introduce enough line noise to make carrying lossless files pointless. :?

Agreed. But for my home stereo I use the level line out through the iPod's dock connector and with the right speakers and the right music you can pick up the difference between lossless and 192 kbps lossy compression. Besides lossless just appeals to my inner OCD geek.

[Dyvim]

Unfortunately, when I did my lossless article (http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/articles.php?action=expand,10552)

Now that I think of it, I'm pretty sure that it was your article that prompted me to finally check out lossless and prompted me to begin my conversion progress. So you're the one to blame! :D Since then I've spent many hours re-ripping my CD's (not to mention trying to get the track titles and album art just right). I had to get a new external hard drive to fit everything (esp. since I also need to keep smaller lossy versions of everything to load onto my small DAPs).

[Damion Chaplin]

Since then I've spent many hours re-ripping my CD's (not to mention trying to get the track titles and album art just right). I had to get a new external hard drive to fit everything (esp. since I also need to keep smaller lossy versions of everything to load onto my small DAPs).

Well thank the lords I'm not the only one! :twisted: :P

[aroma]

So saying you'd gladly pay more for less functionality because it's smaller and lighter just doesn't hold water for me. Thin may be in, but I still don't get it...

It may not hold water with you, but that's the case with a lot of people. I used my original 4G, and then a 5G iPods for a while working out, before I finally moved to a Nano. I payed the money for it because of it's size. The full size iPods were just a tad too big and heavy, and flopped around way too much to be entirely comfortable.

[ctmagnus]

I was never a fan of the original 5G iPod headphones. Is there any way to get a set of the new headphones without buying a new iPod?

[Dyvim]

Is there any way to get a set of the new headphones without buying a new iPod?

Yes, you can buy them from the Apple Store but they will set you back $29.

[ctmagnus]

Is there any way to get a set of the new headphones without buying a new iPod?

Yes, you can buy them from the Apple Store but they will set you back $29.

I forgot about the Apple store. Thx!

[Lee Yuan Sheng]

Goodness me, why do you want to spend US$29 on crappy stock earphones?!

[ctmagnus]

So I can have a pair that I can let get beaten up. ;) All of my current headphones are excessively pampered except for the stock 5G iPod headphones, which I left in the box. Apple's new headphones supposedly sound better than the previous ones, so I would consider giving them a whirl without having to baby them too much.