AfterDawn: Tech news

80GB iPod instead of iPod Video?

Written by James Delahunty (Google+) @ 08 Oct 2005 11:05 User comments (30)

80GB iPod instead of iPod Video? Think Secret is citing information from sources that claim the October 12th announcements from Apple Computers Inc. will not include an iPod with video playback capabilities, but will instead add another addition to the full-sized iPod family with an 80GB capacity. According to the sources, the new iPod will be unveiled along with the new Pro Macs. The 80GB iPod has been described as slightly smaller than current color iPods. It's not known whether Apple will keep the white casing or go with a silver version.
Other improvements to the iPod weren't revealed by the sources but it is likely the software improvements that were seen in the iPod Nano will be included with the new 80GB model. Apparently an iPod with video capabilities is still in development but Apple sees no such reason why it should be launched now or any time soon. Apple hasn't got the agreements with content owners to provide a video download service in iTunes good enough to risk the release of an iPod video.

Also the company believes that the success of an iPod video would rely on customers being able to import video to the device straight from a DVD, like you can import music from a CD. The complications to this process are obvious, copy protection for one (including the laws in most countries that prevent circumvention of copy protection) and you cannot forget the encoding process that would be required; a feature that would make preparing and importing video from a DVD a long process.

Think Secret

Previous Next  

30 user comments

18.10.2005 11:57

who the hell ned an 80gb ipod, i can't even fill up my 20gb ipod.

28.10.2005 13:02

Man, this is insane! Like evilh0ly said, it's quite a task to fill even a 20gb with music (not random crap, good music). This will be good only like if you're travelling around the world by foot or something like that.

38.10.2005 13:47

you guys can't you see, we're being HAD!! nobody needs an 80gb's absurd....basic pc's have an 80gb hard drive. they are once again going for style. smaller and smaller, silver - these improvements cost them next to nothing and yet people will still go out and buy it just because of what it looks like. i don't mind ipods - i have a 40 gb version & me, with 100's upon 100's of cd's (albeit mostly dloaded) don't need all the space i have. people like me and others will begin to see through this stupid selling tactic - they probably have the video capable ipod all ready to sell but then they thought 'hang on a sec, once this is sold, that's it, that is as far as todays mp3's have got, with video capablities' 'ah i know, let's rip our loyal customers off a few hundred million with a new ipod under the illusion that it's the next best thing, then we'll release the video one'- they know full well nobody needs 80 gig. but it's easy money to them. i just hope you here begin to see through this as i have. the ipod is nice, but this is just too much.. Benjers i hope people str

48.10.2005 14:33

This is not abusrd.I rip all my music in Loseless formatss.Standards are 900kbps+ 44.1mhz and joint stereo.That about 15020mb for a 3:30 minute song.Now i am a metal head my bands make songs that are minimum 3 minutes and the longest none solo instramental i have is around 9 minutes.My 60gb Ipod is almost full and will be full this comming weekend when i get all my cds from my parents house that i left there.If i was apple i would put the next one at 80 and 100gb that is a great range for me.I have had an ipod since gen 2 and sizequality and quantity have always been a problem for me.You may say that you cannot tell the difference but i sure can and alot with alot of other metal listneers a solo has to be good.Also classical music can be herad with the differences. So in the end this is not some tatic by apple but rather a push to greater needs.At 40gb i am sure you have alot of 128,192kbps songs (or lower) i prefer getting a exact soundboard copy and keeping it.Try it some time you will notice the difference

58.10.2005 14:43

Your obsession with insanely high quality is almost more absurd than that 80gb ipod. I'm sure that if you hear 3 samples of the same song with different quality (256, 320 and 900+) without know that which song is which bitrate, then you wouldn't tell the difference. Even that 20gb can hold huge amount of 320 quality mp3's and I'm 100% sure you wouldn't hear the difference with your lossless formats.

68.10.2005 15:00

just to let you guys know: I rip all my music cd's at a pretty standard 192kbps, and i've filled a 60GB and a this would be ideal for me. Don't be so quick to judge. Besides, if Apple are gearing up for a video iPod release next year, a step up in hard drive size is more than awesome.I'd be pissed if a video iPod was any less than 80GB. Peace out. And again, don't be so quick to judge. Just cos you don't have shed loads of music, doesnt mean the rest of us dont. Hell, there are people with liek, 10 20GB iPods all full. Dan x

78.10.2005 15:02

Oh, and Arcanix: For anyoen who considers themselves an audio buff, the difference between 256, 320 and 900+ is pretty big and easy to spot. I owuldnt be able to say 'thats this bitrate' but i'd be easily able to determine roughly where it was. Again, don't be so quick to judge. Dan x

88.10.2005 15:03

I dont see why the size of the ipod is an issue here, Its still a ipod ,perfect for the mindnumb masses who prefer to let gay U2 commercials decide what they buy, ohlah 80gig hmmm me say external hardrive

98.10.2005 15:13

Spooky, you must be a machine because LAME MP3s are transparent before 300kbps. Hence what 320kbps CBR is called "alt preset INSANE" because nobody needs that many bits to get transparency. However just to be sure you can use 320kbps. As for 900kbps :-) Just one point, you do know that playing lossless on the iPod kills the battery I assume? I do hope you have a hell of a good set of headphones on, and a padded sell to listen your iPod in :)

108.10.2005 15:14

however if you want a second opinion please post your views on Hydrogenaudio. The audiophiles on there are bound to support you and your golden ears :)

118.10.2005 15:14

however if you want a second opinion please post your views on Hydrogenaudio. The audiophiles on there are bound to support you and your golden ears :)

128.10.2005 17:25

actually i do have a good set of headphones there not the best ones out there but they are quite damn near the top there is such a difference in those bitrates and if you cannot hear it then you have deafened your ears from the labors of life to dirkadick:I chose the ipod over the creative and other mp3 players beacuse, the ipod has the better of battery power when playing at 100db(which i listen to) and by deafult the ipod has better integration features then zen or creative or muvo as in intergrated devies batter packs and etc to lordGiro:IT dosent kill the battery though it takes it from about 15 hours down to about 9-10 but that is still enough more then the other brands of 4gen ipods with the belkin battery pack thats about 30 hours of play time at 100db at lossless format so battery power is not a limiting option With the low cost of hard drives and the capacity of them(system)an audio collection is quite common to be in the 100's of GB my self have about 400gb of just metal music that i only listen too, the sheer quantiy makes each listening never a dull moment with such a choice of what to play

138.10.2005 18:15

pretty lame for the so called "one more thing" announcement.

149.10.2005 0:04

who is an idiot? raise your hand.. 128 is good quality... maybe 192 but 900+ im not that obessed with music that i have to hear everytime a band member takes a breath... okay for the few of u that need it.. it should be a request but they shouldnt stock up the stores with 80 gig ipods... the pink ipod is the most sold ipod so far.. why? because its pink small and cute.. nobody really looks at the sizes because most people don't know what the hell they are buying... thats the majority of people.. but if they stock up on ipod that wont sell everyday then they will lose big money... thats why that idea is perfect for online purchasing... thats about it..

159.10.2005 2:45

jwwolf, perhaps you would like to test your ears and see how real this effect is using the method described here: You will find people on this forum that will help you prove your point.

169.10.2005 2:51

jwwolf, Also when you say 100dB what is it that the dB are a measure of? I originally read this as SNR but another interpretation has been suggested.

179.10.2005 4:53

People Apparently it is going to be an ipod video. i dont know if this is as well as or instead of... people in england, buy a copy of 'the news of the world and look at the gadget section. it says that on wednesday, apple will unviel the ipod video with a 60gb hard drive with the price being around 450 (about $800,lol) enjoy

189.10.2005 6:56

Well if it's in the News of the World it must be true!

199.10.2005 7:12

Well if it's in the News of the World it must be true
LMAO but seriously, i think it's true. the design is like the normal ipod but it's 'sideways' and has a widescreen. if my damn scanner worked i'd upload a piccy :)

219.10.2005 21:24

Im trying to imagine how jwwolf looks with his bose headphones on listening to insanely high bitrate metal at 100db on a pink ipod, prolly gay, like everyone else with a ipod. but anyway as he said, "there is such a difference in those bitrates and if you cannot hear it then you have deafened your ears from the labors of life " right, well put sure hope you speak better than you type

2210.10.2005 6:59

fuck off dick i dont have a pink ipod and those are only the minis thus you have not been reading what i hae been typing or you would it comes down to personel preference adn owning the superior player

2310.10.2005 11:48

fuck off dick i dont have a pink ipod and those are only the minis thus you have not been reading what i hae been typing or you would it comes down to personel preference adn owning the superior player
watch your language. please curb it now both you guys as the last thing we want is a flame war.....
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 10 Oct 2005 @ 11:49

2411.10.2005 18:55

Well, this is actually what I've been waiting for. I don't think I'll have a problem getting close to filling an 80gb iPod with lossless audio (the only kind I listen to) I mean, we've had CD quality for how long now? Why should we accept a step back in quality just for the sake of portability? I want to have at least true CD quality when I'm listening to modern recordings. (Yes, I'm the kind of person who buys DVD audio when given the option and doesn't touch iTunes downloads)

2511.10.2005 19:20

I think I'll add to that. Just because you personally can't hear the difference in audio quality, doesn't mean that people with trained ears can't. When music is recorded, mixed, and mastered, it's all done in 24bit/96khz quality (or 32bit floating point). I'm a musician and can definately appreciate it when a crash cymbal doesn't sound like it's in a washing machine (a 128 or 192 bitrate mp3) and the dynamic range of music is perfectly preserved. I want to hear that major 3rd overtone in a powerchord played by an overdriven guitar. Also, if you listen to compositional or jazz music, you'll find that lossless improves the quality much more significantly than today's electrified, compressed, popular music.

2612.10.2005 0:03

Why so narrow-minded? "I don't need an 80GB iPod so there can't possibly be anybody else that needs one." I have over 100GB of music on my PC at 160Kps. I make a living as a DJ and use my iPod to bring along music that would be too cumbersome to carry on CD. I also fill it up with stand-up comedy and podcasts to listen to on long drives. If I could get a 300GB iPod I would. The idea of being able to just use my music in a lossless format instead of ripping it to lossless and converting it to a smaller file is very appealing.

2712.10.2005 2:09

well blues03 with your golden ears you will know that no matter how you encode your music the iPod (with the exception of the Shuffle and the almost as good nano) has poor bass reproduction and fidelity. This has nothing to do with the way the music is digitised and everything to do with the analogue circuitry. 128kbps AAC on a shuffle sounds closer to the original that lossless on a large iPod (I have both and have conducted blind tests to verify this). Follow the hydrogen audio link above to learn about ABX testing.

2812.10.2005 3:45

and if you have good headphones or a good speacker system the bass is reproduced quite well thank you but if you get some shiity 20 dollar sony headphones yeah it will sound horrible

2912.10.2005 9:46

Of course I dont know as much as the people who do this for a living but I am shocked that Apple said there is not enough demand for a video Ipod... have they seen the way UMD's are sky rocketing for the PSP? I think that they are getting a little to comfortable... sony and the japanese mind set isnt out to kill you now, they will teach their kids and grandkids to get your kids and grandkids... Apple should bring out a Video Ipod, there is a lot of demand for it! I own a 60G Ipod Photo and I could not live without it, I take it everywhere but I would BUY a new Ipod Video in a heartbeat! Come on Apple dont take your eyes off the ball, Sony is waiting... and gaining ground

3012.10.2005 12:51 ^ there will be a video ipod As for the iPod's bass reproduction: no, I didn't know that since I've never owned an iPod. I've been waiting for them to have more storage space, haha. That's too bad, though. Hopefully, Apple will improve it's circuitry and coverters.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

Latest user comments

News archive