Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › New iPod Touch, Nano, and Classic released
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New iPod Touch, Nano, and Classic released - Page 2

post #16 of 164
9/9/09 at 5:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob N View Post
Does the new Touch have the 3GS hardware ie new processor etc?
supposedly yes, but only for the 32/64gb versions. the 8gb remains the same.
Reply
post #17 of 164
9/9/09 at 5:49pm
Wasn't the battery life for the 2G 32gb 36 hours?? The new one has 30 hours. Did they really drop battery for the new processor??
Reply
post #18 of 164
9/9/09 at 5:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by spickerish View Post
Wasn't the battery life for the 2G 32gb 36 hours?? The new one has 30 hours. Did they really drop battery for the new processor??
That's what I was asking myself, as I remember the battery life being higher on the 2G Touch.
Reply
post #19 of 164
9/9/09 at 5:55pm
Battery:
  • Rechargeable Battery Rechargeable
  • Battery Enclosure Type Integrated
  • Technology Lithium ion
  • Recharge Time 4 hour(s)
  • Battery Life Details 36 hour(s) , 6 hour(s)
These are the specs from cnet for the Touch 2G, and battery life is reduced.
Reply
post #20 of 164
9/9/09 at 6:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by spickerish View Post
Wasn't the battery life for the 2G 32gb 36 hours?? The new one has 30 hours. Did they really drop battery for the new processor??
Yeah, it's weird...because the Apple site also shows that the "slower" 8gb has an estimated 30 hours of battery life.
Reply
post #21 of 164
9/9/09 at 6:06pm
Definate example of 'dropping the ball' here.

The competition has caught up big time. Maybe we have reached the end of what you can feasibly put into units of this size and power.

As mentioned previously, its now down to pure SQ to set yourself apart from the rest of the pack.
Reply
post #22 of 164
9/9/09 at 6:06pm
I was deeply disappointed by the new iTouch. There's almost no significant upgrade from the G2. Not sure if there's any difference in SQ between the 8gb and 32/64gb though. The 8gb is *just* a G2 with lower price. Anyway, the new Nanos are really great but I've no fond for them.
Reply
post #23 of 164
9/9/09 at 6:13pm
Those two things, in fact, seems to be the only real items of interest. Otherwise, boring.
Reply
post #24 of 164
9/9/09 at 6:25pm
Pretty weak upgrades. Do you really need to hold a press conference for that?

The Shuffle needs controls on the side and at least 8 gb, the Nano needs GPS. Glad they kept the Classic and upped the disk space to 160 gb.
Reply
post #25 of 164
9/9/09 at 7:58pm
Well we can all go on about sound quality on ipods, but truth of the matter is apple will not listen, the majority of people are happy with their ipods and their standard buds that come with them, gimmicks like the camera are to get myface kiddies to get it and record each other, to be honest i'm hoping that someone finds a new chipset in the classic or something to make it worthwhile, maybe they've added new audio chips to all of them, it's too early to tell
Reply
post #26 of 164
9/9/09 at 8:22pm
Well i've heard some pretty nice things about the sq of the iPhone 3GS in these forums, and I'm hoping the new "faster" iPod Touch (3G?) 64gb is the same because getting a Touch would be the most convenient option for me being a Mac and iTunes user.
Reply
post #27 of 164
9/9/09 at 8:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOUNDinterpreter View Post
Well i've heard some pretty nice things about the sq of the iPhone 3GS in these forums, and I'm hoping the new "faster" iPod Touch (3G?) 64gb is the same because getting a Touch would be the most convenient option for me being a Mac and iTunes user.
interesting, i may have to try it out, but it doesnt have the capacity for all my music an my music is ripped in Apple lossless too so i was wanting to get an ipod classic with large capacity but i dunno, i'm going to go check them out at the apple store in london sooner or later and see whats what
Reply
post #28 of 164
9/9/09 at 8:56pm
I hope it will not exploded or getting very hot as in several unfortunate incidents with iPhone 3Gs.
Reply
post #29 of 164
9/9/09 at 9:14pm
I'm surprised that there is no camera for the touch, but maybe they wanted to keep it as an exclusive feature which only the nano has. Disappointing that its only a VGA camera though...most people carry a camera phone (which now usually have megapixel cameras anyway) so what's the point??

The radio would be great though. If only they had put a radio in the classic... The comeback of 160GB capacity is making me consider getting a hard drive based iPod and re-ripping all my music into Apple Lossless.

What's the general consensus about 320k mp3 vs Apple Lossless in terms of SQ?? I'd be using triple.fi's straight from the iPod headphone out.
Reply
post #30 of 164
9/9/09 at 9:32pm
So are these at Apple stores yet? I'm seriously disappointed by the lack of a camera. I sold my 1G thinking the 3G would have a camera so I'm seriously disappointed. I may buy a used 1G 8gb if I can find one pretty cheap <$100 just for applications and then go for the Zune HD but it's all riding on sound quality now.

Seriously though, whats up with no 16gb models? I bet Steve Jobs is going to come out and say that people don't like the number 16, they prefer 8 and 32.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › New iPod Touch, Nano, and Classic released