IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
New iPods are out, new ipod are out
PlazzTT
post Sep 6 2007, 10:13
Post #26





Group: Members
Posts: 160
Joined: 17-January 02
Member No.: 1067



Should Rockbox still work on the new 160GB classic? They're still 5.5G, right?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
loophole
post Sep 6 2007, 10:31
Post #27





Group: Members
Posts: 273
Joined: 18-June 03
Member No.: 7254



QUOTE (Canar @ Sep 5 2007, 17:10) *
I can't believe Apple is charging for ringtones. That's ludicrous. I can make my own ringtones for free for phones that can't even do video, and I get way better selection too.


There are two programs already out - one free, one not free (and I'm sure there are others) which allow you to add custom mp3 or AAC ringtones onto your iPhone.

QUOTE (PlazzTT @ Sep 6 2007, 01:13) *
Should Rockbox still work on the new 160GB classic? They're still 5.5G, right?


I don't imagine so, the hardware will be completely different to support the new OS. Does anyone know if it's true that they are running OS X?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Sebastian Mares
post Sep 6 2007, 10:49
Post #28





Group: Members
Posts: 3633
Joined: 14-May 03
From: Bad Herrenalb
Member No.: 6613



The Touch yes, but I don't think it's the case for Shuffle, Nano and Classic.


--------------------
http://listening-tests.hydrogenaudio.org/sebastian/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ShowsOn
post Sep 6 2007, 11:53
Post #29





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 369
Joined: 28-June 02
From: South Australia, AUSTRALIA
Member No.: 2421



QUOTE (PlazzTT @ Sep 6 2007, 18:13) *
Should Rockbox still work on the new 160GB classic? They're still 5.5G, right?


I would wait and see. It seems it can output a progressive scan image (up to 576p), and that it may work at higher H.264 AVC bitrates than the old 5.5G. That would suggest it has significantly upgraded electronics, and thus may not work with the current rockbox effort, although I doubt the changes are drastic.

Wait about two days, and there will be disections all over the internet.


--------------------
www.petitiononline.com/RHCPWBCD/petition.html
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
PlazzTT
post Sep 6 2007, 13:10
Post #30





Group: Members
Posts: 160
Joined: 17-January 02
Member No.: 1067



Great. Someone on Wikipedia has taken the liberty of calling the new 80GB and 160GB "sixth-generation" but I don't think that's anything official.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jarsonic
post Sep 6 2007, 13:53
Post #31





Group: Members
Posts: 200
Joined: 30-September 01
From: C-ville, VA
Member No.: 83



Well, it does have a new UI, a new enclosure, etc... so I say 6th Gen is acceptable.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kornchild2002
post Sep 6 2007, 16:15
Post #32





Group: Members
Posts: 2080
Joined: 8-April 05
From: Cincinnati, OH
Member No.: 21277



I don't think the iPod classic is a new generation iPod. Before, Apple always called the full sized iPod an iPod. There was that one time when they released the iPod photo that they called it a different name. Other than that, they have always just called it an iPod.

Now they gave it a new name, the iPod classic. I would call these newer iPod classics by their name, they aren't 6G iPods. So the new iPods are still 2G iPod shuffle, 3G iPod nano, 1G iPod classic, and 1G iPod touch. If anything, that iPod touch deserves to be called the 6G iPod.

I think that the upgrades from a 5G/5.5G iPod to a iPod classic are enough for a whole new generation but Apple added that little classic tag at the end of the title thus making it a whole new iPod not even in the same category as the 5G/5.5G iPods. So the official single iPod name died and Apple is moving on.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kwanbis
post Sep 6 2007, 18:01
Post #33





Group: Developer (Donating)
Posts: 2362
Joined: 28-June 02
From: Argentina
Member No.: 2425



QUOTE (skamp @ Sep 6 2007, 06:51) *
And again, the prices in euros are ridiculous compared to those in US dollars. The 8GB nano sells in France for €174,75 (€209 tax-inclusive), which, at the current rate, is equivalent to $238.49 / $285.27, versus $199 (tax-exclusive) in the US.
The 8GB iPod Touch sells for €258.36 / €309 ($352.36 / $421.66) versus $299 (tax-exlusive), and the 16GB sells for €341.97 / €409 ($466.69 / $558.16), versus $399 (tax-exlusive).
oh, but if you go the "currency convertion route", what about us, poor non-dollar-non-euro-non-pound, countries? For me is 1200 pesos de iPhone (1x3.2) :s


--------------------
MAREO: http://www.webearce.com.ar
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
AtaqueEG
post Sep 6 2007, 18:39
Post #34





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1336
Joined: 18-November 01
From: Celaya, Guanajuato
Member No.: 478



I will get the 80GB one. The battery in my 5th gen 30GB is dying.

160GB is still way too much for me. And I have over 1000CDs! And I don't feel like enconding at higher bitrates. V5 is enough for me.

Kinda off-topic: Does anyone know how can I add album art to my MP3? Eventually Apple will come out with a hard-drive based iPod Touch or I will get an iPhone and I want to take advantage of its album-cover browsing feature. Please help me on this.


--------------------
I'm the one in the picture, sitting on a giant cabbage in Mexico, circa 1978.
Reseñas de Rock en Español: www.estadogeneral.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kwanbis
post Sep 6 2007, 18:48
Post #35





Group: Developer (Donating)
Posts: 2362
Joined: 28-June 02
From: Argentina
Member No.: 2425



it just reads any image file on the folder of the mp3s.


--------------------
MAREO: http://www.webearce.com.ar
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
AtaqueEG
post Sep 6 2007, 19:08
Post #36





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1336
Joined: 18-November 01
From: Celaya, Guanajuato
Member No.: 478



QUOTE (kwanbis @ Sep 6 2007, 11:48) *
it just reads any image file on the folder of the mp3s.


Shouldn't it be better to embed? Any way to automate this process? Sorry, last question on this subject.


--------------------
I'm the one in the picture, sitting on a giant cabbage in Mexico, circa 1978.
Reseñas de Rock en Español: www.estadogeneral.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ron Jones
post Sep 6 2007, 19:58
Post #37





Group: Members
Posts: 412
Joined: 9-August 07
From: Los Angeles
Member No.: 46048



QUOTE (kornchild2002 @ Sep 6 2007, 07:15) *
Now they gave it a new name, the iPod classic. I would call these newer iPod classics by their name, they aren't 6G iPods. So the new iPods are still 2G iPod shuffle, 3G iPod nano, 1G iPod classic, and 1G iPod touch. If anything, that iPod touch deserves to be called the 6G iPod.

I suppose it might really depend on the iPod's future. In 9-12 months, will Apple even offer anything like an iPod classic? If the touch will eventually use a hard disk, as the traditional iPod always has, and if the classic model is axed, will it lose the "touch" moniker? Would it then be the 7G iPod?

I'd say, to make it easier, the classic should be the 1G classic, and the touch should be the 1G touch. Then, if Apple decides to offer a later product solely called 'iPod", that'll be the 6G. Otherwise, we might end up back-tracking, calling certain iPods "true 6G" or what have you. Then again, what defines a "generation"?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kornchild2002
post Sep 6 2007, 20:08
Post #38





Group: Members
Posts: 2080
Joined: 8-April 05
From: Cincinnati, OH
Member No.: 21277



QUOTE (Ron Jones @ Sep 6 2007, 12:58) *
I suppose it might really depend on the iPod's future. In 9-12 months, will Apple even offer anything like an iPod classic? If the touch will eventually use a hard disk, as the traditional iPod always has, and if the classic model is axed, will it lose the "touch" moniker? Would it then be the 7G iPod?

I'd say, to make it easier, the classic should be the 1G classic, and the touch should be the 1G touch. Then, if Apple decides to offer a later product solely called 'iPod", that'll be the 6G. Otherwise, we might end up back-tracking, calling certain iPods "true 6G" or what have you. Then again, what defines a "generation"?


I agree with you in the naming and I have no idea where Apple is going. Maybe they are phasing out the sole iPod name and going with different variations. The iPod classic might be the last hardware scroll wheel device that we see from Apple. In another year, they could very well release a 2G iPod touch that ends up replacing everything they have except for the iPod nano and iPod shuffle. Apple is throwing everyone for a loop here with the naming. At ilounge, people are arguing that all past generation iPods (ie the 1G, 2G, 4G, 4G photo, 5G, and 5.5G) are called iPod classic as that is what Steve Jobs said. That means that the recently released iPod classic would be known at the 6G iPod. I think they were taking his speech too literal though.

So I too will be calling the new iPods the 1G iPod touch and the 1G iPod classic.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
goodnews
post Sep 6 2007, 21:06
Post #39





Group: Banned
Posts: 232
Joined: 20-January 06
Member No.: 27228



I edited my previous post in this thread with this link, but am posting here so it can be seen by people reading the latest posts to the thread:

Apple and Steve Jobs are offering a $100 Apple store credit for previous iPhone purchasers (as a measure of "goodwill"):

http://www.apple.com/hotnews/openiphoneletter/

This post has been edited by goodnews: Sep 6 2007, 21:06
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
AndyCar
post Sep 11 2007, 14:22
Post #40





Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 19-May 03
Member No.: 6715



QUOTE (dB @ Sep 6 2007, 05:40) *
Hi guys.

About new iPods: what are their S/N ratio and Total Harmonic Distortion (THD)?
Are they still use the Wolfson Dac (24 bit like the Wolfson Wm8750S in Teclast players?)?

Thanks


You might be intersted in this information that I've found on head-fi.org forums:
DAC and output stage info from Vinnie of Red Wine Audio, the author of iMod

This post has been edited by AndyCar: Sep 11 2007, 14:23
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bawjaws
post Sep 11 2007, 15:13
Post #41





Group: Members
Posts: 173
Joined: 10-December 02
Member No.: 4043



QUOTE (AtaqueEG @ Sep 6 2007, 10:08) *
QUOTE (kwanbis @ Sep 6 2007, 11:48) *

it just reads any image file on the folder of the mp3s.


Shouldn't it be better to embed? Any way to automate this process? Sorry, last question on this subject.


This is built into iTunes now, since version 7 iirc, though I think you have to provide an email address or credit card or something to sign up with the iTunes Store.

See "Fetching covers" on this page.
http://www.apple.com/itunes/jukebox/coverflow.html

Having said that, it's not perfect, just based on text matches so you might want to use some of the other services or just Amazon/Google image search to snag some. Getting it into iTunes is just drag'n'drop or cut and paste
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sTisTi
post Sep 11 2007, 15:29
Post #42





Group: Members
Posts: 385
Joined: 25-June 04
Member No.: 14895



The Apple pages list as minimum requirements for Windows systems XP or Vista. Has anyone tried if the new ipods still work on Win2k?


--------------------
Proverb for Paranoids: "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers."
-T. Pynchon (Gravity's Rainbow)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kornchild2002
post Sep 11 2007, 17:15
Post #43





Group: Members
Posts: 2080
Joined: 8-April 05
From: Cincinnati, OH
Member No.: 21277



It is unknown if the iPods will work with Windows 2000 using 3rd party software. However, iTunes 7.4 simply will not install and won't work with Win2k. So right now, the new iPods cannot work under Windows 2000. There might be some 3rd party programs that come out later down the line but nothing is known right now.

Many people on iLounge are complaining about that but I don't think it is a big deal. Windows 2000 was released 7-8 years ago (I remember buying a PC back in 1999 that came with Windows 2000) so it is pretty old. Most of the PC market is running Windows XP and newer computers are running Vista. I don't think Apple is asking too much from their users by requiring them to spend less than $100 to upgrade to Windows XP Pro.

Then again, many people have been running Windows 2000 for many, many years now and are happy with it. I guess we can't expect Apple to support the aged OS forever.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Viv Savage
post Sep 12 2007, 09:31
Post #44





Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 6-September 07
Member No.: 46835



QUOTE (kornchild2002 @ Sep 11 2007, 18:15) *
It is unknown if the iPods will work with Windows 2000 using 3rd party software.
With my current iPod I am using Red Chair's Anapod. You can find this at http://www.redchairsoftware.com/anapod/featpw.php. It has the added benefit of being able to move mp3s back to the hard disc which was the prime reason I bought it to begin with. I don't know whether the program has been updated to include the latest batch of iPods, but they say they support all of them.

QUOTE
Many people on iLounge are complaining about that but I don't think it is a big deal. Windows 2000 was released 7-8 years ago (I remember buying a PC back in 1999 that came with Windows 2000) so it is pretty old. Most of the PC market is running Windows XP and newer computers are running Vista. I don't think Apple is asking too much from their users by requiring them to spend less than $100 to upgrade to Windows XP Pro.

Then again, many people have been running Windows 2000 for many, many years now and are happy with it. I guess we can't expect Apple to support the aged OS forever.
Microsoft still supports it, so in my opinion it could be supported by thrid party developers as well. Then again, it is Apple's choice whether they'll support it or not...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
loophole
post Sep 12 2007, 10:21
Post #45





Group: Members
Posts: 273
Joined: 18-June 03
Member No.: 7254



QUOTE (AndyCar @ Sep 11 2007, 05:22) *
QUOTE (dB @ Sep 6 2007, 05:40) *

Hi guys.

About new iPods: what are their S/N ratio and Total Harmonic Distortion (THD)?
Are they still use the Wolfson Dac (24 bit like the Wolfson Wm8750S in Teclast players?)?

Thanks


You might be intersted in this information that I've found on head-fi.org forums:
DAC and output stage info from Vinnie of Red Wine Audio, the author of iMod


This "Vinnie" is a joke.

He said he couldn't even do any fast A/B switching let alone it being a double blind test.

quotes like "I've only spent around 1 to 2 hours of listening to these two units, but so far I already prefer the sound of the iMod 5.5G with Vcap dock... there is a little more weight in the bottom and the top-end is a little warmer/sweeter sounding. The 6G is a little thinner sounding in comparison." Classic audiophile speak. I just googled what a Vcap dock is and it's some snakeoil voodoo black box costing $390 plus S/H.



He's obviously very invested in this magical black box he's paid $390 for and now all the other idiots in that thread are taking it as gospel that the iPod has subpar quality just because he used a lot of big words like sinewave and push-pull output stage. Uggh.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
germanjulian
post Sep 12 2007, 13:59
Post #46





Group: Members
Posts: 207
Joined: 8-September 03
Member No.: 8746



GOT my iPod 160GB today. cleaned my itunes libary/mp3 files so cant wait to go home and fill it up... I will do a little audio test with my shure "high end" headphones and my mp3 collection but I am sure I wont find any difference smile.gif

wait 7 hours
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Whelkman
post Sep 13 2007, 05:55
Post #47





Group: Members
Posts: 91
Joined: 22-January 02
Member No.: 1111



QUOTE (kornchild2002 @ Sep 11 2007, 12:15) *
Windows 2000 was released 7-8 years ago...we can't expect Apple to support the aged OS forever.

The other side of the argument is:
  • XP is only 20 months "newer" than 2000, a time frame that pales in comparison to over six years of runtime for both.
  • Architecturally (and practically), there is little difference between 2000 and XP. You'll find many more differences between OS 10.1 and 10.4, which spans less than 2000's and XP's reign. To be fair, Apple supports old versions of Windows better than old versions of OS X. Even 10.3, less than four years old, is close to useless now.
  • 2000 still has a sizable install base (though not in the consumer sector).
  • It just isn't that much effort to support 2000. If it were, every other program wouldn't do it. Other than Apple, Microsoft is the only company which comes to mind that puts unnecessary restrictions on operating system versions (for selfish reasons on their part).
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Whelkman
post Sep 13 2007, 06:24
Post #48





Group: Members
Posts: 91
Joined: 22-January 02
Member No.: 1111



QUOTE (loophole @ Sep 12 2007, 05:21) *
I just googled what a Vcap dock is and it's some snakeoil voodoo black box costing $390 plus S/H.

I prefer this version:

http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.p...43925.msg397023

What is it with "audiophiles" and molded plastic clashing hideously with outdated wood design? My favorite is seeing an 80s style dull silver turntable connected to a giant wooden amplifier six inches away. If you're gonna pay tens of thousands of dollars for audio equipment, at least buy stuff that looks nice together.

Another thing: what is it with "burn-in"? What does this even mean in the context of modern electronics? Do people really believe that "accelerating burn-in with 24/7 linear power" will "increase the dimensionality" of their music? Are they even aware that "linear power" means "convert voltage with simple transformer"?

The ridiculous dancing smileys aren't convincing me I should drop $400 on $10 of electronics and wood. The thing looks like a giant door stop.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
germanjulian
post Sep 13 2007, 10:20
Post #49





Group: Members
Posts: 207
Joined: 8-September 03
Member No.: 8746



lets keep the discussion on ipods not "magic" audio components.

My Classic review:
So i filled it up (took ages at@10MB a second I think) and so far so good. the static hissing sound is much lower then the previous ipods but it was not something you heard anyway when actually listening to music not pausing music.

Audio quality: cannot hear a difference really. I used several songs and swaped between my previous 60GB ipod and this one listing to metal, classical, jazz and bjork... oh I used E500PTH / SE530PTH headphones. Oh the songs are lame v-2 or higher normally.

The rest: mhh just an ipod. nice gui, cover flow seems to work OK (don't know how many albums I have but I am impressed it fetches artwork so quickly when scrolling madly).
The only thing which I am having issues with is when scrolling fast sometimes the "alphabet" jumping features works sometimes not... odd.

My conclusion: Best ipod so far, especially for price and 160GB storage smile.gif (actually 149GB)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kanak
post Sep 13 2007, 14:12
Post #50





Group: Members
Posts: 1190
Joined: 12-January 06
From: Cambridge, MA
Member No.: 27052



QUOTE (germanjulian @ Sep 13 2007, 05:20) *
lets keep the discussion on ipods not "magic" audio components.

My Classic review:
<snip>



My 160 gb classic ipod has a slight lag when i go from say, the genre menu to the main menu or from the album menu to the main menu. Does your ipod display the same lag too? (FYI: I have loaded it with ~60 gb of music, all with album arts.) It seems that the "cover display" thing in the main menu is the reason for the delay.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th October 2014 - 08:04