[ime_NY]

Haha. Roboman, the only "WTF" thing I think Apple can do with the third generation iPT is kill it off completely and issue a statement saying "we killed our iPod Touch because it was making us too much money...and because our users all want Zune HDs"

(though I'm sure the Zune HD will be a very nice piece of gadgetry and worthy competitor, there's something deep down inside me that lusts more for a special limited-edition Beatles iPod Classic.... )

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Satchmo Just a thought, anyone think the iPod Touch will come with a higher res OLED screen that can play HD movies? Not that it's entirely needed, but given that the Zune HD is OLED and priced aggressively, one would think Apple needs to be roughly in the same feature space.

I would love a higher resolution, but mainly larger and wider, OLED display. The big black bars on the top and bottom of the iPhone and iPod touch irk the shit out of me, because if you measure the iPhone it's pretty much a perfect widescreen shape. But nooo, we get this weird in-between 3:2 thing. It's maddening!

Keep in mind that the Zune HD's OLED display is actually lower resolution that the iPod's, though. It's 480x272, the same as the PSP screen (and a good bit narrower than the iPhone's 480x320 screen). The "HD" in "Zune HD" comes from the fact that it can output HD video, as well as play HD Radio, not from it having an HD display (because it doesn't). A better example of a high-quality OLED display would be found in Samsung's i8910 OmniaHD, which has a 3.7-inch, 640x360 display (the new so-called "qHD" standard).

[joveblue]

Originally Posted by Satchmo Just a thought, anyone think the iPod Touch will come with a higher res OLED screen that can play HD movies? Not that it's entirely needed, but given that the Zune HD is OLED and priced aggressively, one would think Apple needs to be roughly in the same feature space.

Would be great, but they'd need to solve the problem of having 60,000 apps developed for a screen of a certain size and resolution.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by joveblue Would be great, but they'd need to solve the problem of having 60,000 apps developed for a screen of a certain size and resolution.

Letterboxing?

As long as the screen got larger it's not like the app "window" would have to shrink in size. It's just that, where there's now blank spaces, there would be screen. Old apps could continue to work just the same (they'd make it look sort of like an old iPhone when they ran).

[nikstar101]

I think this event will solely be a music event, iPods and iTunes only. Maybe Apple TV or something, but certainly no MacBooks or iMacs. Just not their style any more.

But will Steve, be there. Yes i think he will. He loves the iPod/music thing more than Macs, so i think he will want to be there.

[psmith2.0]

...and I don't even think they'll announce it, or confirm that in any sort of official statement leading up to the show. They'll just let it be a pleasant, unhyped surprise (if they said Steve was doing it, suddenly that's the story and not the iPods...the next week would be endless articles and blogs about that). Better to just say nothing and have it happen.

I think the lights will dim, the "take your seat" music will fade and he'll simply walk out on stage and everyone will lose their minds. It'll be awesome to see on the QuickTime upload later that evening.



Think about it. If Phil Schiller was doing this, it would've already been said. They made a point of letting us know that he'd be keynoting WWDC and previous get-togethers ("Join us as Phil Schiller, Senior VP of..."). They've not said anything about Phil (or anyone else) at this September 9 event. So I take that "silence" as a hint...

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by SKMDC Dhani Harrison appears to be a bright guy and a good influence on the Beatles camp.

I agree. He seems to have his head on straight about a lot, what little I've seen and heard from (and about) him.

And as the main players (the Beatles themselves, George Martin and their various handlers and contemporaries) are getting older and passing on, they're going to need a modern, youthful "voice" in their corner for the next generation or two that comes.

May as well be the son of a Beatle, who's a musician himself and seems to take his legacy a bit seriously.

If he can be the spark for branching out into new tech or avenues, that's great. I don't want it to get cheesy, but let's face it...in 2009 (2010 not far away), the Beatles being the only major band not present in the digital download realm is just idiotic at this point. I don't know what they're trying to prove, but when the Stones, The Who, Led Zeppelin and everyone else has got their butts on iTunes (years ago), it's high-time they do too. Plus, they're all four already there...as solo artists! So it's not like there's some sort of philosophical issue with the medium. It's just the band they all used to be in that isn't there...



Relying on physical CD sales from here to eternity is just goofy. This should've happened years ago...

Paul & Co. stand to make even more money and get their music out to others even easier.

If you're a 13-year-old with an iTunes allowance, you're going to spend .99 or $9-12 on a Beatle song or album, especially if you can't drive yourself to the record store (where you're going to spend $15 or more anyway).

[Robo]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 If you're a 13-year-old with an iTunes allowance, you're going to spend .99 or $9-12 on a Beatle song or album, especially if you can't drive yourself to the record store (where you're going to spend $15 or more anyway).

Their CDs are really expensive, too. It's not like they're ever discounted to basically the price of iTunes or anything. Even at, say, Walmart, the White Album is going to cost you $30.00. It's $24.49 on Amazon (plus shipping)! The upcoming remaster is a bit cheaper there ($18.99), but still.

Granted, most of the other albums are more reasonably priced (usually around $12.99 at Amazon for the new remasters; the Revolver and Rubber Soul remasters are only $9.99) but I think putting them on iTunes for $12.99 would still be competitive (since you wouldn't have to worry about shipping, waiting, &c.). And maybe they could even drop some of them (the ones nobody likes, like Beatles for Sale ) to $9.99, after the initial "new remaster" hype wears off.

But probably not. I mean, Harmonix had to pay through the nose for the rights for The Beatles: Rock Band, even with Dhani Harrison on their side. Realistically, the songs are probably going to be $1.49 per. :/ But that means you could still get an album with one of those $15 gift cards, which is better than lots of stores.

I'm telling you, if the remaining Beatles launch their new new Rock Band game without having the Beatles on iTunes, they're stupid. That game is aimed at pretty much everybody - it's a sort of a pick-up-and-play sort of thing - but the people who are going to play it most are probably young people who are used to buying music on iTunes. It could cause a huge upswing in interest of the Beatles' catalog, but not if it's not up for download anywhere. You're telling me I can buy extra Beatles songs to play in Rock Band but I can't buy Beatles songs for my iPod? What. The. Hell.

They're sort of backwards, there.

[psmith2.0]

Yeah, I have to believe that September 9 will see the Beatles on iTunes (if all that other stuff is taking place then as well). Makes absolutely no sense if it's not.

[nikstar101]

After hearing the news that the 40Gb AppleTV is now 1-2 weeks delivery, it does seem to fit in that it will be updated next week.

I would imagine/hope that Apple finally create an all-in-one solution. Something that can stream TV/Music from computers, store media and can also record live TV. With the addition of the iPhone/iPod Touch the Apple TV could then stream recorded media to the devices via the internet (like a Sling Box). That would be good!! Obviously over wi-fi only for the US (due to AT&T).

[joveblue]

Ethernet too please

[nikstar101]

Oh yes and the ability to stream TV over your LAN.

[nikstar101]

maybe not

http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/02/...s-media-event/

Seems that my dreams on an half decent Apple TV could be wrong.....

iPods only it is then.

[ronmexico]

Here's a thought...maybe Apple is teaming up with the Rolling Stones like they once did with U2. It would explain the theme..."It's only rock and roll, but we like it."

[Robo]

Originally Posted by nikstar101 maybe not http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/02/...s-media-event/ Seems that my dreams on an half decent Apple TV could be wrong..... iPods only it is then.

The Apple TV doesn't even need a refresh, just a sizable price drop (and maybe some "Take 3" firmware). 160GB for $199 and we'll talk. (We should see 160GB single-platter drives in the new iPod classic; those have to be cheaper than the dual-platter 160GB design was in May 2007. EDIT: Wait, the Apple TV uses 2.5" drives? Holy WTF.)

And maybe Apple could actually include a damn video cable with the thing? HDMI? Pretty please?

[Doxxic]

Originally Posted by Roboman I suppose "Revolution No. 9." would be seen as too obvious.

That would be so perfectly appropriate that the fact Apple didn't choose it actually proves that The Beatles will not be on iTunes on the 9th!

[psmith2.0]

...or you can choose to look at it from the other angle, and realize that it's so obvious and "duh" (and Apple rarely does "obvious and duh"), that they would've given the whole thing away and ruined the surprise.

Better to fake us out with a Stones lyric instead. Keeps us off guard and wondering...

[Iago]

Originally Posted by Roboman The Apple TV doesn't even need a refresh, just a sizable price drop (and maybe some "Take 3" firmware). 160GB for $199 and we'll talk. (We should see 160GB single-platter drives in the new iPod classic; those have to be cheaper than the dual-platter 160GB design was in May 2007. EDIT: Wait, the Apple TV uses 2.5" drives? Holy WTF.) And maybe Apple could actually include a damn video cable with the thing? HDMI? Pretty please?

Exactly. The internals are there for a great device, it's just the software that holds it back, IMO.

[Brave Ulysses]

Originally Posted by Doxxic That would be so perfectly appropriate that the fact Apple didn't choose it actually proves that The Beatles will not be on iTunes on the 9th!

Actually, the fact it is on Sept 9 may just be apple's way of stealing the spotlight away from the beatles announcements/releases if they couldn't come to an agreement. Apple will certainly get more attention that day now than the beatles releases would have received without an apple event.

[Partial]

So can I expect anything cool on the iPod Touch besides the following things? Anything that the iPhone 3GS possibly doesn't have? Do these guys have a GPS in them?

1. 200 dollars
2. 16gb default size
3. Camera

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Partial So can I expect anything cool on the iPod Touch besides the following things? Anything that the iPhone 3GS possibly doesn't have? Do these guys have a GPS in them? 1. 200 dollars 2. 16gb default size 3. Camera

I'm not sure about the price drop - with Zune HD prices, MS has obviously planned on iPods staying the same.

But it still is a recession (?), and $229 was a somewhat odd price for a product to begin with, so who knows.

[turbulentfurball]

Originally Posted by Roboman The Apple TV doesn't even need a refresh, just a sizable price drop (and maybe some "Take 3" firmware). 160GB for $199 and we'll talk. (We should see 160GB single-platter drives in the new iPod classic; those have to be cheaper than the dual-platter 160GB design was in May 2007. EDIT: Wait, the Apple TV uses 2.5" drives? Holy WTF.) And maybe Apple could actually include a damn video cable with the thing? HDMI? Pretty please?

I dunno, this seems like the real deal!

[Wyatt]

Originally Posted by Roboman I'm not sure about the price drop - with Zune HD prices, MS has obviously planned on iPods staying the same. But it still is a recession (?), and $229 was a somewhat odd price for a product to begin with, so who knows.

I don't think Microsoft gave any consideration to future iPods. It's been obvious for a long time that the touch was getting a camera, but they didn't add that to the Zune HD. It's pretty clear that Microsoft is doing what they always do. They're shooting for where Apple is, not where they're going.

[Iago]

Originally Posted by Partial So can I expect anything cool on the iPod Touch besides the following things? Anything that the iPhone 3GS possibly doesn't have? Do these guys have a GPS in them? 1. 200 dollars 2. 16gb default size 3. Camera

Originally Posted by Roboman I'm not sure about the price drop - with Zune HD prices, MS has obviously planned on iPods staying the same. But it still is a recession (?), and $229 was a somewhat odd price for a product to begin with, so who knows.

Originally Posted by Wyatt I don't think Microsoft gave any consideration to future iPods. It's been obvious for a long time that the touch was getting a camera, but they didn't add that to the Zune HD. It's pretty clear that Microsoft is doing what they always do. They're shooting for where Apple is, not where they're going.

I would be very surprised if the iPod Touch didn't get some sort of price cut, especially at the lower end. Apple will continue to sell through their existing stock at a much lower price point before shifting the units on to Best Buy, Target, et al. as they always do, but I think they'll reduce the entry point for the iPod Touch fairly significantly.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Wyatt I don't think Microsoft gave any consideration to future iPods. It's been obvious for a long time that the touch was getting a camera, but they didn't add that to the Zune HD. It's pretty clear that Microsoft is doing what they always do. They're shooting for where Apple is, not where they're going.

The Zune HD leaked out in, what, April? And it started development how much earlier than that? It was hardly obvious that the iPod touch was going to have a camera then.

I'm just saying that I'm not expecting a camera and a capacity bump and a price drop and whatever other improvements Apple makes. A price drop to $199 would certainly be nice, but if it happens I'm going to allow it to be a pleasant surprise, not something I'm expecting (and would be disappointed if it didn't happen).

BTW, I'm not sure if we'd see a price drop on any other than the low-end, $229 model.

[Iago]

Originally Posted by Roboman BTW, I'm not sure if we'd see a price drop on any other than the low-end, $229 model.

^This. Apple tend towards introducing bigger capacities at last-gen prices in their iPods rather than price-cuts as such. I think we'll see a lower gateway to the iPod Touch (more affordable than ever is a great selling point right now, and the margins on iPod Touch are sufficient that Apple could make the cut) but the upper end will be the same price

[Jasoco]

I want the iPod touch's to be updated with one space pushed to the next levels. 16, 32 and 64 for the same prices. Is 64GB flash cheap enough to do this and still keep the $400 price for the high end? Because I reallllllllly want a 32GB for $300. 16 is just toooo small for me. Also, I have a good feeling the touch's will have cameras. And I can't wait.

I'd also go for an orange touch... or at least a white one.

Also iTunes 9 would be nice as long as it was a rewrite. I don't use the new features they put in 8 anyway. I just listen to music. I can see it, "iTunes 9 for Intel only".

I already own all the Beatles. I don't need no iTunes Beatles. Bah humbug!

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Jasoco Also iTunes 9 would be nice as long as it was a rewrite.

I agree that it's needed, but precisely none of the rumors are pointing towards that, sadly.

I think the timing would certainly be right for an "iTunes X" next year, though.

Other than that, I think you'll get everything else you want...except for maybe an orange iPod touch. You and Paul will just have to settle with tangerine cases on that one.

(But, seriously, I hope they keep making the iPod nanos in all the colors.)

[Iago]

Originally Posted by Roboman I agree that it's needed, but precisely none of the rumors are pointing towards that, sadly. I think the timing would certainly be right for an "iTunes X" next year, though. Other than that, I think you'll get everything else you want...except for maybe an orange iPod touch. You and Paul will just have to settle with tangerine cases on that one. (But, seriously, I hope they keep making the iPod nanos in all the colors.)

Right click a song in iTunes.

Get Info Rating > Show in Finder Create Apple Lossless Version Reset Play Count Reset Skip Count -- Star Genius Play in iTunes DJ Play Next in iTunes DJ Add to iTunes DJ -- Uncheck Selection -- Add to Playlist > Show in Playlist > - Copy -- Get Album Artwork Clear Downloaded Artwork Get CD Track Names Apply Sort Field >

IMO this is the worst piece of design in a piece of current, shipping Apple software.

[psmith2.0]

An iPod touch in colors just doesn't sound very exciting (or even sensible) to me. It works on the nano because it's small and cute (never underestimate "small and cute" ), and you've got both the front and back surface to play with (add colors).

The iPod touch, like the iPhone, is pretty much "all screen" on one side, and...I don't know, it would just seem like a great big "eh?" to do just the back (as the user, you'd never really see it, and, unlike the iPhone, you're not holding it up to your head where others can easily see the colored back.

I don't think we'll ever see colored iPod touch models. And we might be nearing the end of the rainbow nanos in about 36-40 hours, I have a feeling. They change these things - design, shapes and colors - fairly drastically each year. I seriously doubt, following Wednesday's event, the iPod nano will a) look the way it currently does, and b) come in those vivid, Crayola-like colors.