Is it even possible to squeeze all those components into an iPod?

Battery, screen, click wheel, microphone, PCMCI-type card, antenna, hard drive, logic board(s), audio out… what else is there?

Maybe it could be looked at another way. Could the Trea be squeezed enough to hold an iPod with hard drive?

carol-mary-mac - 09 November 2005 11:49 AM

Is it even possible to squeeze all those components into an iPod?

Battery, screen, click wheel, microphone, PCMCI-type card, antenna, hard drive, logic board(s), audio out… what else is there?

Maybe it could be looked at another way. Could the Trea be squeezed enough to hold an iPod with hard drive?

look how tiny the Razr is from Motorolla

Carol Mary Miller - 09 November 2005 11:49 AM

Is it even possible to squeeze all those components into an iPod?

Battery, screen, click wheel, microphone, PCMCI-type card, antenna, hard drive, logic board(s), audio out… what else is there?

Maybe it could be looked at another way. Could the Trea be squeezed enough to hold an iPod with hard drive?

Carol, you might be on to something with that. We’re not far away from more affordable high-speed data connections to cell phone networks via new plans and services from the cell phone carriers. I saw a Verizon commercial for $59 for data though a PCMCIA card, so it’s coming.

Squeezing all those components into an iPod-sized device is no mean feat. Even the Treo and Blackberry cell phones are bricks by iPod standards.

I firmly believe Apple won’t sit out this dance as they did the PDA. Instead of making a cell phone become an iPod, how about making the iPod do the work of a cell phone. iChat on the iPod, anyone?

My gut still thinks in line with the home media center: a DVR/PVR/whatever with DVD or Blu-Ray burner that can record in h.264, and has quicktime streaming server and iTunes built-in. It’s networkable via built-in ethernet or airport so you can program it and enjoy recorded media from anywhere in the house.
We’re very close to it already. Apple just needs to throw a Mac Mini, EyeTV, and 10.4 Server in a blender and hit play.

Tera Patricks - 15 November 2005 12:23 PM

Carol Mary Miller - 09 November 2005 11:49 AM

Is it even possible to squeeze all those components into an iPod?

Battery, screen, click wheel, microphone, PCMCI-type card, antenna, hard drive, logic board(s), audio out… what else is there?

Maybe it could be looked at another way. Could the Trea be squeezed enough to hold an iPod with hard drive?

Carol, you might be on to something with that. We’re not far away from more affordable high-speed data connections to cell phone networks via new plans and services from the cell phone carriers. I saw a Verizon commercial for $59 for data though a PCMCIA card, so it’s coming.

Squeezing all those components into an iPod-sized device is no mean feat. Even the Treo and Blackberry cell phones are bricks by iPod standards.

I firmly believe Apple won’t sit out this dance as they did the PDA. Instead of making a cell phone become an iPod, how about making the iPod do the work of a cell phone. iChat on the iPod, anyone?

PDA’s are dead, replaced by cel’s

Apple might do an iPhone, that would be cool!
it could be the standard in phones(since there is no standard now)

And here I thought that there were several standards - AMPS, CDMA, GSM, GPRS, etc. That’s the best thing about standards, there’s so many to choose from!

I know that I am in the minority, but I don’t want my cell with me 24/7.

I have a digital assistant. I definately don’t want it 24/7.

My iPod is simply a device that allows me to listen to music all over the place. I can plug in headphones, car jack, speakers in the garage various rooms at home or at buddies. That’s all it is. That’s all I want.

I will buy a new one when I can put TV shows or movies on it to plug in the car (with a portable larger screen) or on my buddies 42” LCD thing (that I can’t even look at in the store let alone afford) or at my mom’s etc. The point is that I want a portable player that I can carry my entertainment around with me convieniently and output it to various devices as the situation warrants.
I am sure that someone will eventually market something the size of a nano that tries to be all things to all people - and does everything badly. I’m one of those who doesn’t even want one.

For me the iPod experience is all about allowing me to listen or (eventually) watch and relax where and when I want.

John

This post jams a few nails into the board, right on the head.

wright2john - 16 November 2005 02:59 PM

I know that I am in the minority, but I don’t want my cell with me 24/7. I have a digital assistant. I definately don’t want it 24/7.

Agreed. I’ve left the cell phone ‘mania’ behind already. Mine is getting close to a ‘dial out only’ device. It stores my AddressBook and iCal and some other information that’s important to carry around. But I’m not a ‘Blackberry’ or Treo person who must be connected all the time everywhere. It doesn’t do email, either.

Only half a dozen people have my cell phone number and it’s likely to stay that way.

I will consider a next generation (not ROKR) cell phone with a nice camera, ability to sync to my Mac, and iTunes, but it must have at least 1,000 songs.

Otherwise, where I go, my iPod goes. Why? More below…

wright2john - 16 November 2005 02:59 PM

My iPod is simply a device that allows me to listen to music all over the place. I can plug in headphones, car jack, speakers in the garage various rooms at home or at buddies. That’s all it is. That’s all I want.

The key to understanding ‘wright2john’s statement is to understand the need for control. The iPod is morphing into a future device pathway that basically stores what we want, when we want, AND, importantly, will present that information/data/etc., when we want and where we want.

There’s tremendous value in being able to use it to listen to music (all that we own), view TV shows, movies, music videos (perhaps all we own), but allowing us to be able to ‘plug in’ to a music system, the car’s speakers, a TV screen; anywhere and anytime we want. No hassles. Plug in, click, listen, watch.

wright2john - 16 November 2005 02:59 PM

I will buy a new one when I can put TV shows or movies on it to plug in the car (with a portable larger screen) or on my buddies 42” LCD thing (that I can’t even look at in the store let alone afford) or at my mom’s etc. The point is that I want a portable player that I can carry my entertainment around with me convieniently and output it to various devices as the situation warrants.

Same here (unless I can get Bambi to gift me an iPod with video; hint, hint). I have do doubts that the iPod is moving quickly in that direction. I saw a video of Steve Jobs and he used the term ‘ecosystem.’ Apple has that term nailed with the iPod, mostly with OS X and Macs.

More than just entertainment, I’d like to carry it all with me. That can’t be done unless there are two devices; cell phone, and new iPod.

wright2john - 16 November 2005 02:59 PM

I am sure that someone will eventually market something the size of a nano that tries to be all things to all people - and does everything badly. I’m one of those who doesn’t even want one.

For me the iPod experience is all about allowing me to listen or (eventually) watch and relax where and when I want.

And this is where we’ll probably see multiple branches form for future iPods or comparable products from Apple. I can see some iPod functionality go into cell phones, as with the ROKR but more capability. I can also see the iPod move toward ‘the device’ that we carry. Music, videos, Home Directory (including documents). We can then plug in the iPod to any Mac and we’re ‘connected’.

I can also see a next gen ‘iPad’ device that’s a flat table Mac with OS X’s full functionality; which would make it an iPod and Mac. Fully portable, ala Newton, and fully syncs with the desktop Mac.

As likely as that is a next gen iPod that brings wireless capability and the option, via a plug in card, of connecting to cell phone carriers networks. Then, the cell phone is no longer needed. VOIP via an iPod. With video. Cool.

I have managed to keep my iPod out of my purse and pockets. You know, so it doesn’t scratch up the screen.

I think MWSF is going to see SEVERAL product announcements:
—At least 1 Intel Mac (probably the Mini, possibly an iBook)
—One or more new products that fill in the integration gaps in music, video, photos, Mac, TV, PVR, WiFi, etc.  This (these) will likely be hardware/software combos.
—iLife updates
—Who knows what else?.....

Keyboard, my money is on a Mac mini. Apple can’t have an iBook that runs faster or looks cooler than a PowerBook, besides, not that much software is ready for Intel chips. I expect something new for iLife, and I’d pay $129 for an Airport Express AV which acts as a wireless to TV hub.

I find it interesting with regard to Intel Mac rumors that everyone is coming up with the argument that there will be no or not much ported software available if the switch is supposed to take place early next year.

Just because we can’t download universal binaries so far (what for, who has an Intel-based Mac already) we cannot infer that software hasn’t been ported already. The fact is we just don’t know. I am pretty certain that most of the companies - especially those developing with Cocoa - should have been able to port their applications to Intel by now.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the release of the first Intel-Macs is immediately followed by a rapid succession of releases of universal binaries for many popular applications.

Utz - 18 November 2005 12:59 PM

I find it interesting with regard to Intel Mac rumors that everyone is coming up with the argument that there will be no or not much ported software available if the switch is supposed to take place early next year.

Just because we can’t download universal binaries so far (what for, who has an Intel-based Mac already) we cannot infer that software hasn’t been ported already. The fact is we just don’t know. I am pretty certain that most of the companies - especially those developing with Cocoa - should have been able to port their applications to Intel by now.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the release of the first Intel-Macs is immediately followed by a rapid succession of releases of universal binaries for many popular applications.

I read somewhere that apple sent out some universal binaries.

?

Universal binaries are not ‘sent out.’ They’re made by using the latest version of Apple’s compiler. Write your code, click ‘PowerPC’ and ‘Intel’ and your application is compiled in a ‘universal binary’ which will run on both PowerPC Macs and Intel-based Macs.

Bambi Hambi - 19 November 2005 12:18 PM

Universal binaries are not ‘sent out.’ They’re made by using the latest version of Apple’s compiler. Write your code, click ‘PowerPC’ and ‘Intel’ and your application is compiled in a ‘universal binary’ which will run on both PowerPC Macs and Intel-based Macs.

http://www.theappleblog.com/2005/11/15/apple-silently-starts-sending-out-universal-binaries/

I think what’s being said is that Apple is now sending out applications as Universal Binaries, which means they run on both PPC chip and Intel chip Macs. Many Mac developers have been doing this for some time as they gear up their Xcode for Intel-chip Macs. So, in the strict sense, UBs are not really ‘sent out’ as much as the application’s package is sent out and it contains Universal Binaries which allow an app to run on both PPC and Intel Macs. No harm, no foul.