Jump to content
IGNORED

iPod G5 Video


Couchrocket

Recommended Posts

My son was here for Thanksgiving with his new iPod Video. I'm glad he was.... I'd not messed with any iPods before so didn't really understand them other than as "mp3player."

 

I was just about to drop some fairly serious cash for an "image tank" type device dedicated to uploading image files from my digital SLR while on extended shoots.

 

But, I discovered that the 60 gig iPod video does this quite nicely, and allows me to view my images, play them as a slide show on my TV (with music of my choice!), etc. as well as just "store them" when on the road -- to bring home and upload to my PC for editing and printing, and archiving.

 

Add to that all of what an iPod "normally does" with music, audio books, etc., and this little sucker is quite a value and quite versatile. thumbsup.gif

Link to comment

Good for you, the IPOD is IMHO handsdown the best choice. I hope the IPOD lures you into using an Apple computer in the future, if you don't all ready. thumbsup.gif

Link to comment
ClearwaterBMW

there is no substitute for what APPLE can do and has done for the portable music and picture an video industry.

this company who's 128kb macintosh i bought in 1985.... that almost died in the pc-driven world 15 years ago, has been resurrected to be a world leader in the computer world

 

come aboard the APPLE EXPRESS and join the company that makes equipment that:

edited the last 20 academy aware winning movies

is the company used to edit 90% of the world's magazine

..........

and the list goes on

i still own pc's as well (mac's aren't as mainstream as i'd like)

but, spend some time in an APPLE STORE if you can this holiday season/soak it all in

 

greg

Link to comment
russell_bynum
How do you get the images from the camera card to the ipod?

 

I'm not sure if the new iPods have this built in, but you can get an adapter for the older iPods that let you do this. Basically, it plugs into the iPod, and you run a USB cable from the camera to the adapter to transfer the images.

 

IMO, cool aftermarket stuff like this is what makes the iPod more desirable than any of the other mp3 players on the market.

Link to comment

I have a 4th-generation, 60 Gig iPod - it is photo-capable but NOT video capable.

 

Anyway - I use it to cache photos from my camera all the time. A small adaptor allows you to plug your camera-to-computer USB cable directly into the iPod, which auto-magically sees the camera and prompts you to upload the photos. I was able to do this, first time, right out of the box, without any configuration or instructions.

 

Then when you get home, a USB cable from the iPod into the computer allows you to upload the photos to your PC.

 

Really great gadget, the iPod. It's amazing that Apple has been able to just dominate a relatively mature market - MP3 players have been around for years.

Link to comment
russell_bynum

It's amazing that Apple has been able to just dominate a relatively mature market - MP3 players have been around for years

 

I agree. I believe that's because of a few things:

1. Apple's marketing machine

2. Apple Music Store

 

Thanks to Apple's Marketing machine, iPod made MP3 players something that you didn't have to be a computer nerd to use (of course, that had been the case for quite a while, but nobody seemed to know that), and it was "cool" to be seen with those little white earbuds hanging out of your head.

 

And the Apple Music Store made it easy to buy music online without having to buy an entire CD, wait for it to be delivered, rip it, etc. The DRM stuff made the record companies happy, and the rest is history.

 

iPod's design has never seemed particularly innovative (despite the marketing hype) to me. It works. The interface is OK. It's got drawbacks and shortcomings, just like every other player I've seen. The only thing it really had going for it, was it was smaller than the other similar players on the market.

 

itunes is, at best, a mediocre application. Again...it works, but I don't like it nearly as much as some of the competition like Music Match, etc. It works well enough that I don't bother with the other apps anymore, but I do find myself missing some features of Music Match now and then.

 

At any rate, Apple has manged to really do well in this market, and seems to have the aftermarket support behind it to really make for some cool possibilities.

 

BTW, Apple did the same thing with USB. USB was available for years on the PC platform, but nobody was making any hardware to take advantage of it. Then iMac (another benefactor of the Apple marketing machine) came out and the only way to do anything with it was USB, so suddenly everyone's making USB stuff...which we all benefit from.

Link to comment

IMO, cool aftermarket stuff like this is what makes the iPod more desirable than any of the other mp3 players on the market.

 

Yes, the amount of 'iGadget' accessories is staggering, and along with all of the leopard-skin cases are a few really nifty devices like these. That is a nice bit of functionality.

 

As far as the most desirable, well, it obviously is for many but I do wish that Apple would take care of just a few remaining lapses relative to some other players on the market. They seem to be doing OK in getting battery life up to something reasonable but the iPod needs a better amp so as to make it more compatible with higher-end headphones and when are they going to add the ability to set custom equalizer settings? I was sure they would finally do this in Gen5 but amazingly... no. The amp problem is easily solved by an external amplifier but the lack of EQ is harder to solve. When and if they finally attend to these last few weaknesses then I will probably own one of the things myself.

 

BTW, Apple did the same thing with USB. USB was available for years on the PC platform, but nobody was making any hardware to take advantage of it. Then iMac (another benefactor of the Apple marketing machine) came out and the only way to do anything with it was USB, so suddenly everyone's making USB stuff...which we all benefit from.

 

I'm not so sure about that, USB was going strong well before Apple adopted it. I doubt that it took a product with 5% of the PC base to spur development of a peripheral standard that already worked with the other 95%.

Link to comment

I hope this isn't a hijack, since it seems that the thread is about iPod:

 

I haven't found a way to get a really high-quality signal into my home receiver, even using a dock that pulls the signal out of the bottom connector instead of the headphone jacks. Anyone have suggestions?

Link to comment

I have the 60 gig video iPod (black). It's beautiful, but I would caution that the screen is, IMHO, extremeley sensitive to scratches, much more than previous iPods that I have owned. This problem has been noted elsewhere (a review of the new video ipod). I have been treating this thing with kid gloves, and still the screen has mars on it now that weren't there when I got it not long ago. I understand that there is a class action suit against Apple regarding the screen on the iPod Nano for the reason that the screen scratches unreasonably easily. Something to do with a different acrylic compound. I suspect the iPod video may have the same soft screen. If I were you, I would wait a while to see if they fix this problem. It's a bit of a heartbreaker.

Link to comment

but you can get an adapter for the older iPods that let you do this
Yup, that's the ticket. Works great with my digital SLR. Same small adapter. Cost effective.

 

Also, there are "skins" that cover the whole front of the iPod that prevent scratches. I put one on mine pretty much right out of the box.

 

As to Apple's computers, since I'm a big Photoshop user, I "wish" I had gone "Apple" a long while ago. The cinema displays, the dual processors, etc. are very cool for photo editing......

 

However, I've been a PC user since the very first IMB "Personal Computer" -- it had 64k system memory hard wired to the mother board! I've way too much $$ invested in software to make the jump to a G5 Apple computer with the huge cinema display... but wish I could.

 

On the other hand, my son, who is/was an animator for Walt Disney at one time and now for "another big company" in that business.... he's a devoted Apple person who is having to migrate to the PC environment since "Maya" (CGI application) only runs on that platform.

Link to comment
I've way too much $$ invested in software to make the jump to a G5 Apple computer with the huge cinema display... but wish I could.

 

Now that Apple is switching to Intel chips I am under the impression that Windows only software will run on the new Mac's due out next year.

Link to comment
russell_bynum

As to Apple's computers, since I'm a big Photoshop user, I "wish" I had gone "Apple" a long while ago. The cinema displays, the dual processors, etc. are very cool for photo editing......

 

<hijack>

That's hype. Adobe is spending more time and money developing their Creative Suite for the PC than they are for the Mac. New features come out on the PC first. Performance is comparable. If you want dual-processors, you can get that in a high-end PC workstation just like you can get it in a high-end Mac. Big monitors, multiple monitors, etc...it's all available for both platforms. At this point, there's no technical reason to pick one platform over the other.

 

I'm not knocking the Mac...it's a good product (and I do admire the hardware design) but there's little reason other than personal preference to go one way vs. the other.

</hijack>

Link to comment
russell_bynum

I'm not so sure about that, USB was going strong well before Apple adopted it. I doubt that it took a product with 5% of the PC base to spur development of a peripheral standard that already worked with the other 95%.

 

Nope. My Dad's company makes input devices. When Intel/Microsoft stated that they were going to make USB the next big thing (mid 90's, if memory serves) all of the peripheral makers started developing USB products...but nobody bought them. Part of the problem was Microsoft didn't really support it until Windows 98. Win95b supported it, but was only officially available via an OEM version. Anyway...nobody sold many USB products until the iMac came out. At that point, since that was the ONLY option for adding stuff to the iMac, people started buying the products. Then they spread to the PC.

Link to comment
When Intel/Microsoft stated that they were going to make USB the next big thing (mid 90's, if memory serves) all of the peripheral makers started developing USB products...but nobody bought them. Part of the problem was Microsoft didn't really support it until Windows 98. Win95b supported it, but was only officially available via an OEM version. Anyway...nobody sold many USB products until the iMac came out. At that point, since that was the ONLY option for adding stuff to the iMac, people started buying the products. Then they spread to the PC.
I think the timing is more due to the fact that (as you noted) USB didn't work very reliably until well into the Win98 era, and not fully practical until Win2000/WinXP and USB 2.0. The initial introduction of USB was about as bad a debacle as one could imagine due to Microsoft missteps. They did eventually get it right and this more or less matched the timeframe of Apple's adoption of USB (although I believe that Apple initially tried to standardize on Firewire?) but I don't think one could rightfully draw the conclusion that the success of USB was due to Apple's acceptance of the standard. No doubt it helped of course, but I think the primary reason was simply that Microsoft finally made it work in a large enough number of PCs.
Link to comment
I think the timing is more due to the fact that (as you noted) USB didn't work very reliably until well into the Win98 era, and not fully practical until Win2000/WinXP and USB 2.0.

 

Didn't work reliably on Windows, no. Because, as usual, Apple was leading the charge on new technology. Apple launched the all-USB iMac before Windows had pervasive USB at all, via Win98. Prior to Win98, you had to have either a fresh install of 95 OSR2 or precariously patched (because there wasn't any other kind) Win95.

 

Apple long ago settled on USB to replace ADB (Apple Desktop Bus) for input device purposes. They never really pushed FireWire for such purposes; its goal was always high-speed pluggagle devices. And, of course, they succeeded, well before there was a USB 2.0.

 

In short, the widespread adoption of USB mostly awaited the monopolists in Redmond, who never see a trend before it's already reached ho-hum status.

 

Have we now thoroughly hijacked Scott's thread?

Link to comment

Expecting anything on windows to be reliable is a joke anyway tongue.gif Next PC I get will be an apple laptop, I'm so tired of windows garbage. I should have bought a mac a year ago but it just wasn't cost effective. If moving to Intel chips doesnt make them any better in cost I'll probably just suck it up and do it anyway.

 

Also on par with the iPod is iRiver. They are one very amazing company as well. I've had a bunch of their products and love[d] them to bits.

Link to comment

At this point, there's no technical reason to pick one platform over the other.

As a "user" an not a technical person... I'm really glad to hear this... thanks!

 

As to the hi-jack... no worries... probably too many of my posts are dangerously close to hi-jacks! And, I very much enjoyed the side trip. Sometimes the mild "wanderings" of various threads is what makes this place so darned interesting!

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...