Recommended Posts

i found the "fake" on spymac with many others. I just found this one the best idea because it has all the same features, buttons, jog-dials, etc. from the original iPod in a smaller case with either a flash card (much cheaper) or a hard drive, which this one has. It completely makes sense. Also, the "miniPod" would probably have the same fatures, but, i wouldnt say crippled, but whatever. The lcd would not be as crisp or big, the hard drive would prbably be a flash drive, etc. They want to make a really cheap version for people who like cheap flash players, but the really nice style of the iPod.

yeah. If something like that came out, i would definitly buy one. 256 MB gets me about 95 songs, and that is quite a lot to carry around in my pocket... imagine 2 GB!... holy crap!

i agree with you xSammyx, 20 to 40 GB is more then i'd ever need to carry around. Also, I wouldn't want to carry such an expensive device around.

that small thing costs 250$, so freaking ridiculous

The smaller something is the more it costs, like laptops and cellphones. I do agree however that the ipod mini's price is 50 bucks too much :no: Apple needed to have one for $149 (2GB) and one for $199 (4GB). Oh well, lets hope they realise this and fix it.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • After watching the Apple event earlier this week it is quite the contrast. Apple is going back and tweaking the code to make things more efficient in may areas of MacOS. Windows is boosting your electric build to hide their issues.
    • It is silly there is no simple way to check whether this profile has been activated. CFRs are normal, but trying to even hide the fact if it's on / off seems silly, especially for something so user-facing. Surely Microsoft is "proud" of their engineering efforts on this one and ought to display it somwhere in the GUI.
    • Many Linux distros are not known for excellent battery life, so I'm not sure that is the best example. A more apt example may be Apple, but Apple's CPUs are simply far more efficient than Intel & AMD at single-threaded tasks like these, so "boosting" is not as power-hungry and less heat-inducing. Not to mention Apple will hardly engage P-cores for basic UI tasks; they use a pretty complicated QoS scheme to only activate P-cores for more serious workloads like HTML / JS execution or decompression or application launch. Microsoft is (smartly) doing it for launch, but also for UI tasks, which is the more nonsensical part: why ... do Windows 11's UIs need modern CPUs to boost? It should load so quickly that there's not even time for the CPU to boost.
    • I've not seen any controlled testing and, judging by Microsoft's mentality, within a year, they'll have added so much more bloat, it'll undo any perceptible latency benefit and we'll have boosted the CPU clocks for nothing.
    • It depends: heat soak is a thing. Initially on cold boot-up, the heatsinks & heatpipes are at ambient temp. After heatsinks & heatpipes warm up (through normal usage), they don't immediately cool to ambient temp when the load goes away. So their baseline is higher and the trigger point for fans is much less stress. Add a few more CPU spikes → it's too hot to stay at the same fan RPM → fans get triggered to start up up much sooner / get triggered to ramp much more quickly.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      slackerzz earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      highriskpaym earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      highriskpaym earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      highriskpaym earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      FBSPL earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      501
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      198
    3. 3
      +Edouard
      157
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      84
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      74
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!