iPod Touch - the New Flagship iPod


Recommended Posts

I doubt the iTunes Store will be available on the iPod touch as well. I also doubt WiFi will be included. Apple doesn't let you sync your iPhone via WiFi and they don't let you browse the iTunes Store. If Apple didn't include these on the higher up model, then there is little to no chance of them happening on the lower end model.

The iPod touch will include these things from the iPhone:

iPod.app

Calendar

Photos

Clock

Calculator

Notes

Contacts from the Phone app.

Add Games from the 5.5g iPod and you have the iPod touch.

The iPod isn't going to get Safari. That's a higher-end feature more suited for the iPhone.

What makes an cell-phone more worthy of 'higher end' features than a portal music box?

^ I agree with that... or it would get a very stripped-down version of Safari to support the iTunes store only. Nothing else.

Safari (or more correctly Webkit) isn't used by the iTunes Music Store or anywhere else in iTunes.

Edited by the evn show

Well the iPod is supposed to be simple. Cramming it with features makes it less simple for the end user, and thus against what apple does. The iPhone gets away with it because it's supposed to be a smart phone, the iPod on the other hand is not supposed to be a web browser thing... I could be wrong, but I also doubt that the iPod Touch (if it even is announced) will have Safari on it.

What makes an cell-phone more worthy of 'higher end' features than a portal music box?

Because the iPhone is on the top of the product chain. Introducing high-end features in low end products canibalizes sales of the high-end product. This is why you don't see video in current nano.

Safari (or more correctly Webkit) isn't used by the iTunes Music Store or anywhere else in iTunes.

Any application made by Apple that renders a web view uses webkit.

Because the iPhone is on the top of the product chain.

By what measure is it at the top of the chain? Could a $600 iPod not be 'the top of the chain' instead?

Introducing high-end features in low end products canibalizes sales of the high-end product. This is why you don't see video in current nano.

While that may be true of like products (ie: notebook computers), it doesn't make sense to stretch that argument to unlike products. I think a good rule of thumb not to break things down much further than Apple does—or did—in their SEC filings when talking about product categories. Going much further starts to allow for some pretty silly arguments (for example: iPod Nanos are canabalizing MacBook Pro sales because both are portable and can play music and show pictures).

Baring exceptional edge cases: people that want a phone aren't going to buy a music box instead. Likewise, people that want a music box aren't going to buy a phone instead.

Any application made by Apple that renders a web view uses webkit.

Fine, lovely. iTunes still doesn't use Webkit to render the iTunes music store. "What you see may look like the web but it isn't HTML, and it isn't rendered by Webkit."*

I could demonstrate this for you if you like.

* Dave Hyatt commenting on Webkit and iTunes a year or two after the launch of iTMS on Windows.

Edited by the evn show

The iPhone is currently at the top of the line as it has the most features and is the highest priced. It's an iPod+phone. Apple could ofcourse make a $600 iPod and move it up the chain, but I don't see that happening. The iPod and the iPhone are both in the same category so the argument of canibalization can apply.

Please demonstrate it, if it isn't webkit then I'm interested to see what it is. It's Webobjects. Should have researched beforehand :p But then again if Apple didn't bother to put the store in the iPhone or the AppleTV, then I'm guessing they can't be bothered to put it into the iPod either.

Edited by osirisX

Multitouch display similar to iPhone + WiFi + Internet Browser + Ability to add apps like iPhone + Price under $300 = My purchase.

If they went against all rules of nature and added native divx/xvid support, I would pick one up in a heartbeat. I am just hoping someone decides to port VLC to one of these things.

Edited by 12Iceman
The iPhone is currently at the top of the line as it has the most features and is the highest priced. It's an iPod+phone. Apple could ofcourse make a $600 iPod and move it up the chain, but I don't see that happening.

Seems like a bit of circular logic.

"The iPhone is 'the king' because it has the most features and highest price. The iPhone has the most features and highest price because it is 'the king'."

The 60 GB iPod Photo debuted at $599: the same price as the top-end iPhone so there is precedent for an iPod at that price-point.

The iPod and the iPhone are both in the same category so the argument of canibalization can apply.

By the same reasoning one could argue the iPhone and Macbook are also in the same category. That's not a line of thought I intend to pursue (the breakdown of product categories Apple used/uses in their SEC filings seems much more reasonable to me) so I'll simply disagree with your categorization and stop any further discussion on this part of the topic.

Please demonstrate it, if it isn't webkit then I'm interested to see what it is.

(me@home : ~) $ otool -L /Applications/iTunes.app/Contents/MacOS/iTunes
/Applications/iTunes.app/Contents/MacOS/iTunes:
	/usr/lib/libz.1.dylib (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 1.2.3)
	/System/Library/Frameworks/Carbon.framework/Versions/A/Carbon (compatibility version 2.0.0, current version 128.0.0)
	/usr/lib/libSystem.B.dylib (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 88.1.2)
	/System/Library/Frameworks/IOKit.framework/Versions/A/IOKit (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 275.0.0)
	/System/Library/Frameworks/QuickTime.framework/Versions/A/QuickTime (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 35.0.0)
	/System/Library/Frameworks/vecLib.framework/Versions/A/vecLib (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 182.18.0)
	/System/Library/Frameworks/AGL.framework/Versions/A/AGL (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 1.0.0)
	/System/Library/Frameworks/OpenGL.framework/Versions/A/OpenGL (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 1.0.0)
	/System/Library/Frameworks/CoreAudio.framework/Versions/A/CoreAudio (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 1.0.0)
	/System/Library/Frameworks/AudioUnit.framework/Versions/A/AudioUnit (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 1.0.0)
	/System/Library/Frameworks/CoreServices.framework/Versions/A/CoreServices (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 18.0.0)
	/System/Library/Frameworks/SystemConfiguration.framework/Versions/A/SystemConfiguration (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 1.0.0)
	/System/Library/Frameworks/Security.framework/Versions/A/Security (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 24989.0.0)
	/System/Library/Frameworks/AudioToolbox.framework/Versions/A/AudioToolbox (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 1.0.0)
	/System/Library/Frameworks/AddressBook.framework/Versions/A/AddressBook (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 477.5.0)

Note the complete lack of any reference to WebKit.

I also Googled up a reference for my Dave Hyatt (Safari & WebKit Architect at Apple) quote wrt. iTunes and WebKit. My memory of the exact wording was off, but the message was correct:

iTunes and WebKit

Just to clear up a common misconception, iTunes does not use WebKit to render the music store. What you see when you visit the iTunes music store may look "web-like", but it isn't HTML, and it isn't rendered by WebKit.

http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/hyatt/archives/2004_06.html

EDIT:

It's Webobjects.

The iTunes store is a WebObjects application but that matters about as much to iTunes as Neowin being a PHP application does to Safari. The iTunes store send XML down the pipe to iTunes. iTunes has an XML parser driving a custom view.

Edited by the evn show
I guess we will just see what happens tomorrow :p

I'm not arguing that I think any of this crap is going to happen, just that the reasons with which people argue <x> or <y> is true are flawed.

All the talk about browsers, wifi, and gps seems silly to me but I haven't got the time nor desire to argue against most of it because the arguments in favor don't amount to anything more than "it'd be so cool" and "iPhone did it". There's just not much substance to talk about.

The only reason I decided to comment about iPods with Safari bundled to enable access to iTMS is because I could make a reasonable technical argument against the statement without any real research or effort (I already knew a fair bit about iTMS, DAAP, and Webkit).

But then again if Apple didn't bother to put the store in the iPhone or the AppleTV, then I'm guessing they can't be bothered to put it into the iPod either.

Who's to say they won't add it to the iPhone today via software update? All the required hardware is already there, and if they build an app for iPod touch there's very little to no porting involve to bring it to the iPhone. Apple TV may require a little more work, but probably not that much. Remember, they all run embedded versions of OS X.

I'm not arguing that I think any of this crap is going to happen, just that the reasons with which people argue <x> or <y> is true are flawed.

All the talk about browsers, wifi, and gps seems silly to me but I haven't got the time nor desire to argue against most of it because the arguments in favor don't amount to anything more than "it'd be so cool" and "iPhone did it". There's just not much substance to talk about.

The only reason I decided to comment about iPods with Safari bundled to enable access to iTMS is because I could make a reasonable technical argument against the statement without any real research or effort (I already knew a fair bit about iTMS, DAAP, and Webkit).

Who's to say they won't add it to the iPhone today via software update? All the required hardware is already there, and if they build an app for iPod touch there's very little to no porting involve to bring it to the iPhone. Apple TV may require a little more work, but probably not that much. Remember, they all run embedded versions of OS X.

well, I will say again. anything is possable. Enough with the "they didnt add this in this one, so they wont do it to the new one" that kind of talk is just childish, given the fact you do not know how the world works and that anything can happen.

Live Coverage sites listed on macrumors

http://www.macrumors.com/2007/09/05/the-be...event-coverage/

and for those who aren't on the pacific time zone...here's something to help in anticipation. LOL

Time Zones Clocks

http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/cust...tinent=namerica

Edited by .Kompressor

Thanks for that - big help.

Also just to let you all know, they have closed the Online Apple Store for "updating". :D

So looks like we're definately gonna be able to buy the new iPods online today!!

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore/

It looks awesome, but since I just got a 5.5G ipod as a warranty replacement, I won't be getting this one and I'm sort of glad. I like to leave my iPod on shuffle mode and simply reach into my pocket to skip tracks I'm not in the mood to hear. With this touch screen, there's no way I'd be able to do that.

I do the same thing with my PSP, leave it on shuffle and just flip through the tracks with my hand in my pocket.

i love engadgets smart ass attitude lol.

9:57am - "Good morning ladies and gentlemen, welcome to this special Apple event. We'd like everyone to take a moment to turn off ALL electronic devices." Apparently this special privilege is reserved Stevie, and Stevie alone. Well, this isn't an airplane, and if they think we're NOT going to liveblog this, they've got another thing coming. But yeah, we'll def switch off our ringers.

the new nano talk about fatty.. would rather the new features old body design looks like a floppy disk shape now yuk!

same propaganda about battery... -.-

ipod touch here we go :)

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • It's amazing that anyone still uses this bloated trash.
    • @Sayan...I have defended you at various points as I hope you know. This headline however is utter trash...shame on you sir!
    • An actual cosmic "Eye of Sauron" had been looking straight at us all along by Sayan Sen Image by Kovin P. Vasquez via Pexels | Not representative An international team of researchers has solved a long-standing mystery surrounding a distant blazar known as PKS 1424+240, helping explain why it produces some of the brightest high-energy gamma rays and cosmic neutrinos ever observed despite appearing to have a relatively slow-moving jet. The findings were published on June 6 in Astronomy & Astrophysics Letters. The study addresses a broader challenge in astrophysics: understanding how extreme cosmic objects accelerate particles to very high energies and produce very high-energy (VHE) photons and neutrinos. PKS 1424+240 is located billions of light-years from Earth. It has attracted attention for years because it is both a powerful source of VHE gamma rays and the brightest known neutrino-emitting blazar in the sky, according to observations by the IceCube Neutrino Observatory. It is also associated with one of the strongest peaks in IceCube's nine-year neutrino sky map A blazar is a type of active galactic nucleus powered by a supermassive black hole that pulls in surrounding matter and launches jets of plasma moving close to the speed of light. What makes blazars unique is their orientation. One of their jets points almost directly toward Earth, making them appear exceptionally bright across the electromagnetic spectrum and allowing scientists to study some of the most extreme physical processes in the Universe. The scientists exclaimed it's like the 'Eye of Sauron' in deep space. Usually, the brightest gamma-ray-emitting blazars are expected to have jets that appear to move very quickly. However, radio observations of PKS 1424+240 suggested that its jet was moving much more slowly, creating a contradiction that became part of a long-running problem known as the "Doppler factor crisis." To investigate, researchers analyzed 15 years of observations from the Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA), a network of 10 radio antennas spread across the continental United States, Hawaii and St. Croix. Using a technique called Very Long Baseline Interferometry (VLBI), astronomers combine signals from widely separated radio telescopes to create a virtual Earth-sized telescope capable of revealing extremely fine details. The team combined 42 polarization-sensitive radio images collected between 2009 and 2025, creating a much deeper and more detailed view of the jet than had previously been possible. The observations were carried out as part of MOJAVE (Monitoring Of Jets in Active galactic nuclei with VLBA Experiments), a long-running program that studies the brightness, polarization and magnetic field structures of jets produced by active galaxies. The project aims to better understand how activity near supermassive black holes is linked to high-energy radiation and neutrino emission. “When we reconstructed the image, it looked absolutely stunning,” said Yuri Kovalev, lead author of the study and Principal Investigator of the European Research Council-funded MuSES project at the Max Planck Institute for Radio Astronomy. “We have never seen anything quite like it — a near-perfect toroidal magnetic field with a jet, pointing straight at us.” The image revealed an unusual geometry. The researchers found that Earth lies almost directly in line with the jet, with a viewing angle of less than 0.6 degrees. In simple terms, astronomers are looking almost straight down the jet. This turned out to be the key to the mystery. Because the jet is aimed almost directly at Earth, a relativistic effect called Doppler boosting dramatically increases its apparent brightness. The study found that this effect boosts the emission by a factor of about 30 while also making the jet appear slower than it actually is. “This alignment causes a boost in brightness by a factor of 30 or more,” said Jack Livingston, a co-author at the Max Planck Institute for Radio Astronomy. “At the same time, the jet appears to move slowly due to projection effects — a classic optical illusion.” The nearly head-on view also gave scientists a rare look at the jet's magnetic field. Using polarized radio signals, they detected a clear toroidal, or doughnut-shaped, magnetic field component. The observations suggest the jet carries an electric current and that its magnetic field helps launch, shape and stabilize the flow of plasma. Researchers believe this magnetic structure may also play a key role in accelerating particles to energies high enough to produce both gamma rays and neutrinos. “Solving this puzzle confirms that active galactic nuclei with supermassive black holes are not only powerful accelerators of electrons, but also of protons — the origin of the observed high-energy neutrinos,” Kovalev said. The research was conducted under the MuSES (Multi-messenger Studies of Energetic Sources) project, which investigates how active galactic nuclei accelerate particles and generate different cosmic signals, including light and neutrinos. Scientists say understanding how protons are accelerated and linked to neutrino production remains one of the major unanswered questions in astrophysics. The findings help explain why some blazars can appear to have slow jets while still producing extremely bright high-energy emissions. More broadly, the study strengthens the link between relativistic jets, magnetic fields, gamma rays and high-energy neutrinos. Researchers say the results provide new clues about how some of the Universe's most powerful natural particle accelerators work and offer important insights for multimessenger astronomy, which combines different types of cosmic signals to study extreme events in space. Source: European Research Council, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Gotenks98 is right... Outlook (new) is absolute trash. Doesn't Mozilla have an Enterprise Version of Firebird?
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Reacting Well
      X-No-file earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      pestcontrol46 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      pestcontrol46 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      511
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      273
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      75
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!