[rhythmdevils]

Quote:

Not really, its late so I'm not sure what you mean.  But there is no reason to undertake the expense of following the form factor of the iPhone4 when that form has a function which is to make phone calls.  It's cheaper to throw a craptastic chrome fingerprint magnet on an iTouch than it is a glass backing wrapped in a metal ringed antennae.  Your original point, counterpoint rather, was about costs and skimping on the iTouch right?  The point being up until this generation every iTouch has basically been an iPhone w/o phone ability and more available storage.

My original point was just that the itouch is much cheaper and slimmer than the iphone4, so how could it have all the same features.  If it could, then the iphone4 would be just as slim.  The fact that the antennae is on the outside of the iphone4 means that both iphone and ipod have the same space requirements.  They had to remove something to make it thinner.  Obviously they chose small size over features. 

 

[penartur]

Quote:

Not really, its late so I'm not sure what you mean.  But there is no reason to undertake the expense of following the form factor of the iPhone4 when that form has a function which is to make phone calls.  It's cheaper to throw a craptastic chrome fingerprint magnet on an iTouch than it is a glass backing wrapped in a metal ringed antennae.

Oh, i've thought that apple finally created some good example of design with iphone 4, but it seems that they did it so just because they have been forced to.

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

My original point was just that the itouch is much cheaper and slimmer than the iphone4, so how could it have all the same features.  If it could, then the iphone4 would be just as slim.  The fact that the antennae is on the outside of the iphone4 means that both iphone and ipod have the same space requirements.  They had to remove something to make it thinner.  Obviously they chose small size over features. 

So you think it was form factor over cost savings?  I was inclined the other way.  I guess it doesn't hurt that its both.  I still think its a departure from Apples normal approach w/ their model lineup.  Why not, you can't even watch video on a Nano but it has a touch screen.  /Shrug.  I dunno, seems like this generation of iPhones/Touches/Pods is the most disjointed, quirky and poorly thought out line up so far.  One step forward, two steps back.  Doesn't matter, they'll rake it in.  A phone that can't call, a music/video player with a crap screen, a mini media player that lost video.  Keep teasing new, shiny features while breaking the inherent design of the product.  Meh.  I think Apple must be a bunch of idiot savants that like flinging monkey pooh between solving quadratic equations. 

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

Oh, i've thought that apple finally created some good example of design with iphone 4, but it seems that they did it so just because they have been forced to.

Not sure if thats sarcasm, if not it sounds like you are late to the discussion and missed the boat.

 

[rhythmdevils]

Quote:

So you think it was form factor over cost savings?  I was inclined the other way.  I guess it doesn't hurt that its both.  I still think its a departure from Apples normal approach w/ their model lineup.  Why not, you can't even watch video on a Nano but it has a touch screen.  /Shrug.  I dunno, seems like this generation of iPhones/Touches/Pods is the most disjointed, quirky and poorly thought out line up so far.  One step forward, two steps back.  Doesn't matter, they'll rake it in.  A phone that can't call, a music/video player with a crap screen, a mini media player that lost video.  Keep teasing new, shiny features while breaking the inherent design of the product.  Meh.  I think Apple must be a bunch of idiot savants that like flinging monkey pooh between solving quadratic equations.

It's not really a question.  You can't fit everything from iphone4 into the ipod touch without making the ipod touch bigger.  It also clearly savse costs, as it should, because it's a cheaper product.  I can't help but think you've got some seriously flawed logic here.  Do you complain when a minivan doesn't perform as well as a small car, or when a small car can't hold 4 people?  It's pretty simple really.  The iphone4 is bigger than the ipod touch.  Clearly the iphone4 is bigger because it has to be bigger to do what it does. 
 
It's really easy to sit in the sidelines and complain and talk about how things could be this way and that, but it's another thing when you're faced with realities like the fact that a 5MP camera just wouldn't fit into the ipodtouch case.  Or the fact that a 5MP camera would bring the cost up.  Certainly more fun to just call Apple nazis though.
 
I'm not saying I want an ipod touch.  I have an iphone, and I certainly don't want a second half iphone no matter how small it is. But soon enough the iphone will have big capacity, and I'll only have one device to rule them all...

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Quote:

I posted a comparison between Zune and the new iTouch...

do you have a link or can you quote your comments here? thanks!
 

 

[penartur]

Quote:

Not sure if thats sarcasm, if not it sounds like you are late to the discussion and missed the boat.

It is not a sarcasm, i really do like how iphone 4 looks (in contrast with all these soapy ipods and previous iphones); and suddenly it seems like apple screwed up the iTouch 4g features just to get the opportunity to screw up its appearance/look as well.
But when you're saying i'm late to the discussion, you must be kidding

 

[Somnambulist]

 
Quote:

do you have a link or can you quote your comments here? thanks!
 

It's on the previous page.
 
I'm not an expert on iPods, but is the latest Touch not better spec'ed in areas than the 3rd Gen one? They've always looked very similar (face-on, at least) to an iPhone but they've never been 'identical minus the phone parts', so it's hardly a revelation that the latest one isn't as good hardware wise (less RAM, no IPS panel, e.t.c.). What is apparent though, is that although the iPod was what brought Apple back into the big time, it's no longer their flagship product line and isn't generally as important as it used to be, so it's not much of a surprise that it's lost some of it's sparkle.
 
Oh and Anaxilus, for the record, I know about 10 people personally with iPhone 4's and several others online, and none of them have any problems with signal or calls dropping. Then again, here in the UK we have pretty consistent signal in urban areas, and the iPhone is available on every network, rather than being exclusive to the notoriously bad AT&T that you guys have to put up with. I reckon the whole Antennagate thing would have attracted far less attention if Apple were a UK company and it had been released here first.

 

[LFC_SL]

Quote:

It is not a sarcasm, i really do like how iphone 4 looks (in contrast with all these soapy ipods and previous iphones); and suddenly it seems like apple screwed up the iTouch 4g features just to get the opportunity to screw up its appearance/look as well.
But when you're saying i'm late to the discussion, you must be kidding

lol, I think it is you, yourself and no-one else on that one. They may have cut back on the quality of components for any number of reasons but ugly is not entering anyone's mind here

 

 

[penartur]

Quote:

Quote:
They may have cut back on the quality of components for any number of reasons but ugly is not entering anyone's mind here

However, some users there are saying that apple stripped down the itouch to make it look not like iphone 4 but like old itouch (=ugly).

 

[shigzeo]

What a 'fun' thread. God, Penatur, if you hate Apple so much and have NOTHING at all that is useful to the thread, leave. I don't like the new iPod nano (but I've not used it) and am disappointed that the new iPod touch is thin again (where I'd prefer to have a nice camera), rather than chunky like the iPhone. 
 
If you are so set against Apple and its 'sound quality', you'll be surprised to know that it performs on par with Sony for driving headphones, the only difference is that Apple players have: gapless playback where Sony doesn't, Apple products don't hiss where Sony players hiss massively, and of course, Apple players have no EQ.
 
The last point only is a problem. I love my Sony players, but I can recognise that they have weaknesses. Currently, I own 4 of them and two Apple players. I also have the S:Flo/T51. If you want to argue sound quality, I am ready and can back up each and every claim. Whether you want to talk driving ability, noise, whatever - I am with you.
 
But, this thread is brought completely down by your insistence on bashing. There isn't a speck of truth in most of what you said, just mere reaction. I'm waiting for truth. If anything in this thread shows that sheep exist, it is that you insist in reacting to everything with such intense bleating. That, my friend, is what a sheep does.

 

[Young Spade]

Quote:

So you think it was form factor over cost savings?  I was inclined the other way.  I guess it doesn't hurt that its both.  I still think its a departure from Apples normal approach w/ their model lineup.  Why not, you can't even watch video on a Nano but it has a touch screen.  /Shrug.  I dunno, seems like this generation of iPhones/Touches/Pods is the most disjointed, quirky and poorly thought out line up so far.  One step forward, two steps back.  Doesn't matter, they'll rake it in.  A phone that can't call, a music/video player with a crap screen, a mini media player that lost video.  Keep teasing new, shiny features while breaking the inherent design of the product.  Meh.  I think Apple must be a bunch of idiot savants that like flinging monkey pooh between solving quadratic equations. 

Yep. Personally I think they are pushing the iPod Touch and iPhones, granted that's where most of the money from portable devices comes from anyway. They make a killing with each Touch/Phone sold so why not push it? 
 
I think the nano is a disaster, the reason people liked the old Nano was because it was small enough to listen to music but it had a scroll wheel and a screen big enough to acommodate 2 or 3 hundred songs. 
 
 
The new nano... shuffle with a screen? I could see this being a godsend if you exercised a lot (shuffle with a screen? now I can see what I'm doing) but for people who wanted the old nano design, now they are "forced" into getting an iPod Touch.
 
You also have to remember, most of the main consumer market don't really know how to manage music properly. Sure they might have perfect tagging in iTunes but have someone want to switch from an iPod to something else and move their music over. How many people do you think know how to consolidate the library to one spot, delete the backups (that is if they didn't do this from the start), and save the playlist (if they want to do that) to the computer and reload all of that data into another player?
 
What apple is doing, IMO, is trying to suck loads of people in (what they have been doing over the years) and NOW, since they have a lot, make it harder and harder for you to get out.
 
I think this is slightly on the edge of a conspiracy theory

 

[shigzeo]

There's no reason to run conspiracy theories, Spade; of course Apple want people to buy and iPod and never anything else. But the Nano is, I think, a mistake they will fix next year just as they fixed the abomination of last year's shuffle this year. 
 
As for the market, I think we need to think of the majority of audiophiles (after many years of running with haughty 'audiophiles', I'd rather just put music lovers and audiophiles together as I see no reason to elevate the term, audiophile in any way) just want to listen to music. They probably don't worry about playlists, about perfect tagging, about covers, about song tracklisting. Think about it this way: just 5 years ago, people were buying CD's and five years before that, they organised CD's alphabetically. The market isn't even ten years old yet, so I doubt that even dyed in the wool 'audiophiles' spend much time organising playlists. 
 
For one: it is unnatural and new. Albums have always been about holistic listening: you don't separate songs from the albums. But now, people buy any song, not just singles and add them to their library. It is the step in the right direction in some ways, but eventually may overtake the album and usurp compilations completely. I am fine with that. 
 
But in a few more years, the average user will probably look at albums they way we look at cakes. They'll take what they want and leave the cream. 

 

[yliu]

Someone just reviewed the 6G nano: http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/511535/6g-nano-first-impressions
and the sound seems to be an upgrade from the 5G nano. 
Read post #4.

 

[tds101]

Most any iPod sounds fantastic w/an LOD>Amp combo, and many others have stated it's got improved SQ.