[Megalomania]

I'm not very impressed by the Touch - if I wanted a PDA, I'd buy one, and if I want an iPod I'll buy the classic for the storage capacity. If you're going to spend most of your time staring at your DAP, buy the touch. Otherwise, go with something that's more of a dedicated DAP and less of a person DAP/PDA offspring.

 

[lmilhan]

Apple will not be getting my money until they put the iTouch interface onto a large capacity iPod with 160GB or more. And it isn't a matter of if they are going to do that, it is a matter of when.

As it stands, 16GB is completely useless for my requirements, although the touch interface is very sexy indeed. I'll just wait until the next gen iPod is inevitably released with the touch interface and huge storage capacity.

 

[outlandos]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lmilhan /img/forum/go_quote.gif Apple will not be getting my money until they put the iTouch interface onto a large capacity iPod with 160GB or more. And it isn't a matter of if they are going to do that, it is a matter of when. As it stands, 16GB is completely useless for my requirements, although the touch interface is very sexy indeed. I'll just wait until the next gen iPod is inevitably released with the touch interface and huge storage capacity.

The iPod Touch will always be using FLASH memory, so we might can expect 32GB on the second generation iPod Touch, we definately can wait big time for anything higher than lets say 64 GB.

 

[That dude]

The touch is just not practical to me. It huge and expensive and has limited storage. I'd much rather go for the Creative ZEN. However, the browser program in the ipod is pretty useful. But a PDA has more features and costs so much less.

I love the classic's design and the 160gb storage space. BUT, the interface is so sluggish and the cover flow is slow and only looks good if you have covers for all your songs, which is unlikely. I'd rahther go for the nano. It's ugly and sluggish but at least it's so thin, no one would know you have one.

 

[nickknutson]

I think you guys are missing the point of the touch. They aren't built for audiophiles that want a massive music collection with them at all times, because if they did make one with 80 or 160gb you guys would just complain about the SQ of the device. Also, how often do you listen to all 80 or 160gb's of your music in one sitting? Unless you have an attention deficit disorder and switch songs constantly, you probably don't NEED all that music with you.
The touch was designed with someone in mind, obviously not y'all.

 

[lmilhan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by outlandos /img/forum/go_quote.gif The iPod Touch will always be using FLASH memory, so we might can expect 32GB on the second generation iPod Touch, we definately can wait big time for anything higher than lets say 64 GB.

We'll see.

I'll be sure to bookmark this thread so I can come back and say 'told you so' when the touch interface makes it onto a large capacity iPod. LOL

 

[outlandos]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lmilhan /img/forum/go_quote.gif We'll see. I'll be sure to bookmark this thread so I can come back and say 'told you so' when the touch interface makes it onto a large capacity iPod. LOL

You sure do, I will make it even better:

Before 2010 we will not see anything higher than 64 GB on the iPod Touch!

 

[lmilhan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickknutson /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think you guys are missing the point of the touch. They aren't built for audiophiles that want a massive music collection with them at all times, because if they did make one with 80 or 160gb you guys would just complain about the SQ of the device.

I completely disagree. As long as said iPod maintains a line out, I will be perfectly happy with the sound quality I will be able to get with high bitrate (or Lossless) files being amplified by my Tomahawk and being fed into my D5000s. Not to mention I am pretty confident that Red Wine will eventually figure out a way to perform an 'iMod' on it for those who want to go that route.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickknutson /img/forum/go_quote.gif Also, how often do you listen to all 80 or 160gb's of your music in one sitting? Unless you have an attention deficit disorder and switch songs constantly, you probably don't NEED all that music with you.

How many times have I listened to my entire music collection in one sitting? Exactly zero times. Also, I do not have A.D.D. And no, I don't switch songs constantly, I generally select an album and let it play out in it's entirety. However I do listen to music upwards of 6 hours per day on my portable rig, and I do enjoy having a large variety of music to select from at my fingertips. As such, I always want my entire music collection with me at all times. Do I NEED all my music with me at all times? Of course not. The only thing I (or any of us) really NEED is clothing, shelter, food, drink and air. Not to mention that I simply cannot be bothered with sitting down each and every night at my PC, and picking and choosing what albums, videos and pictures I want to carry with me the next day - what a major pain in the @ss that is compared to just simply plugging in a large capacity iPod and letting my entire music collection synchronize itself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickknutson /img/forum/go_quote.gif The touch was designed with someone in mind, obviously not y'all.

Fair enough. And as such, Apple will not be getting my money (when they actually could have). Will I hurt Apple sales due to my protest? Not by a long shot. But once the masses reveal that they desire a touch interface on a large capacity iPod, Jobs and company will comply. Once again, we shall see...

 

[outlandos]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lmilhan /img/forum/go_quote.gif I completely disagree. As long as said iPod maintains a line out, I will be perfectly happy with the sound quality I will be able to get with high bitrate (or Lossless) files being amplified by my Tomahawk and being fed into my D5000s. Not to mention I am pretty confident that Red Wine will eventually figure out a way to perform an 'iMod' on it for those who want to go that route. How many times have I listened to my entire music collection in one sitting? Exactly zero times. Also, I do not have A.D.D. And no, I don't switch songs constantly, I generally select an album and let it play out in it's entirety. However I do listen to music upwards of 6 hours per day on my portable rig, and I do enjoy having a large variety of music to select from at my fingertips. As such, I always want my entire music collection with me at all times. Do I NEED all my music with me at all times? Of course not. The only thing I (or any of us) really NEED is clothing, shelter, food, drink and air. Not to mention that I simply cannot be bothered with sitting down each and every night at my PC, and picking and choosing what albums, videos and pictures I want to carry with me the next day - what a major pain in the @ss that is compared to just simply plugging in a large capacity iPod and letting my entire music collection synchronize itself. Fair enough. And as such, Apple will not be getting my money (when they actually could have). Will I hurt Apple sales due to my protest? Not by a long shot. But once the masses reveal that they desire a touch interface on a large capacity iPod, Jobs and company will comply. Once again, we shall see...

They have sold over 120 million iPods so far, most buyers do not care about SQ nor the space.

Most people do not even switch the crappy earphones that comes with them! And most people even have 128 bitrate or lower music files on there iPod.

The market for the iPod, Apple's market is totally something different as the common lad on this forum!

 

[BassheadJazz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickknutson /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think you guys are missing the point of the touch. They aren't built for audiophiles that want a massive music collection with them at all times, because if they did make one with 80 or 160gb you guys would just complain about the SQ of the device. Also, how often do you listen to all 80 or 160gb's of your music in one sitting? Unless you have an attention deficit disorder and switch songs constantly, you probably don't NEED all that music with you. The touch was designed with someone in mind, obviously not y'all.

x2, as I've said before, this is going to be the new trendy player that people will (for reasons unbeknownst to me) spend the $300 or $400 on without blinking because they think it's cool. Personally, I really like the idea of the wi-fi built in capabilities because I think it opens up possibilities that we'll begin to appreciate more in a few years once it's developed. As far as SQ goes, well, let me put it this way, I think until we start clamoring for one of the hi-fi companies to build an mp3 player that audiophiles will appreciate, it's pretty much a moot point to complain about SQ, because they're not designed for folks like us, but just the average joe that think iPod headphones sound great.

 

[lmilhan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by outlandos /img/forum/go_quote.gif They have sold over 120 million iPods so far, most buyers do not care about SQ nor the space. Most people do not even switch the crappy earphones that comes with them! And most people even have 128 bitrate or lower music files on there iPod. The market for the iPod, Apple's market is totally something different as the common lad on this forum!

And I'm sure they will sell 400+ million more. And I agree with you about the 'genral public'. I will just wait patiently for the inevitable release of the next generation large capacity iPod with touch interface. It's the next logical step in the iPod evolution, and to release such a product falls perfectly within the Apple iPod business model as it has been run so far to date.

 

[aluren]

i just don't see why people will need such a cool touch interface for music alone. i find a song, play it, and let it play... same thing with video... the touch screen is awesome as a phone because we interact with the phone so much, but for a regular music player, i wouldn't think it's practical. i can totally see why many people would be interested in the ipod touch simply for its coolness factor, but practically speaking it isn't all that of a device... as someone mentioned already, it's difficult to access the device in your pocket to change songs or turn down the volume...

 

[lmilhan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by outlandos /img/forum/go_quote.gif You sure do, I will make it even better: Before 2010 we will not see anything higher than 64 GB on the iPod Touch!

Just for the record, I am not talking about a flash based player. I am talking about taking the 'Touch' interface and marrying it to a large capacity hard drive based iPod. Just out of curiosity, what leads you to believe that something like this is technically impossible to do?

 

[outlandos]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lmilhan /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just for the record, I am not talking about a flash based player. I am talking about taking the 'Touch' interface and marrying it to a large capacity hard drive based iPod. Just out of curiosity, what leads you to believe that something like this is technically impossible to do?

A hard drive is much bigger than the FLASH drive, also it's abit slower and drains a lot more battery aswell.

You don't want to see something like this in the future, now do you:

 

[Rumz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aluren /img/forum/go_quote.gif i just don't see why people will need such a cool touch interface for music alone. i find a song, play it, and let it play... same thing with video... the touch screen is awesome as a phone because we interact with the phone so much, but for a regular music player, i wouldn't think it's practical. i can totally see why many people would be interested in the ipod touch simply for its coolness factor, but practically speaking it isn't all that of a device... as someone mentioned already, it's difficult to access the device in your pocket to change songs or turn down the volume...

For me, audio is just a side use for this (yes I know "iPod" is synonymous with mp3 player and portable audio). Here's why the touch controls are nice-- it allows for the unit to have a much larger screen for VIDEO viewing without having to put physical controls on there. I'll have a 160gb classic for my music collection, and the Touch will be something that goes to the gym to watch tv and movies on, as I feel the screen is large enough that I could actually enjoy those on there (the 2.5" iPod Classic screen doesn't do it for me in situations like that). I think the iPod Touch, tho poised as a PMP or DAP, because of it's software platform will become a bit more than just an audio / video player for all us geeks.

Also... however useless many people might find a full web browser on a DAP, have you ever played with an iPhone? I've tinkered with mobile browsers on Pocket PCs and Palms, but Safari on the iPhone is a whole other experience. As more and more places have free wifi, a pocketable device like this will be *much* more convenient for checking e-mail or reading web sites than carrying around a laptop. That's just my perspective-- I know internet on a DAP is not going to replace a laptop. It's no doubt a luxury at best on a DAP, but it's one I'll enjoy and appreciate having (and that I'm definitely glad they included).

Yeah I wish they'd thrown 160gb in there, but I honestly don't have a need to have my movie collection with me like I like to have my audio with me, so as a video player-- 16gb will do just fine for now.