iPod Touch - the New Flagship iPod

[PyX]

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

[osirisX]

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 evn show]

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 September 5, 2007 by the evn show

[Oompa]

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.

[osirisX]

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.

[the evn show]

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 September 5, 2007 by the evn show

[gonzoislost]

the new UI

http://thinksecret.com/archives/ipodinterface/web/index.html

[osirisX]

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 September 5, 2007 by osirisX

[12Iceman]

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 September 5, 2007 by 12Iceman

[gonzoislost]

what you guys need to know is anything is possable.

[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.

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 September 5, 2007 by the evn show

[osirisX]

I guess we will just see what happens tomorrow :p

[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).

[y_notm]

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.

[gonzoislost]

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.

[.Kompressor]

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 September 5, 2007 by .Kompressor

[Calum Veteran]

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/

[Digitalx]

this will be interesting looks like i'll be sticking round to watch what they have behind the curtain.

[.Kompressor]

Make note of Apple Stock Price before the announcement. :)

12:40 pm EST

Apple Apple IncAAPL

144.108 -0.052 -0.04%

[Digitalx]

rofl

"Usual Apple soundtrack, Coldplay's on the speakers."

[vincent]

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.

[well...]

oooh the tension.....

[Digitalx]

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.

[Digitalx]

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 September 5, 2007 by Digix

[dL]

YES iPod TOUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!! Let's hear the price :)

dL