nice is all I can see (lol I mean say). If sound quality is the same as 5g then I will get the "classic" version with 160GB. that will finally store all my music colletion
http://www.apple.com/ (http://www.apple.com/)
ahh dam it just got one. for £200 and 160GB I am happy now. I also engraved it with: My music is best understood by children and animals.
I listen to some weird stuff
Apple either refreshed or added to entire iPod lineup today! Also $200 off now on 8GB iPhone ($399 instead of $599)!
iPod touch is a real winner (with Wifi), and also the new iTunes Wifi Music Store is nice (for iPod touch and iPhones). Now you can make ringtones for 99 cents too!
Starbucks giving free Wifi access in their stores if using the iTunes Wifi Music store.
Way to go Apple!
Update: Steve Jobs now announced he is giving $100 in Apple store credit to all previous iPhone purchasers as a goodwill "gesture".
See: http://www.apple.com/hotnews/openiphoneletter/ (http://www.apple.com/hotnews/openiphoneletter/)
Was just about to post the information mainly because I also have a question: the "old" 5.5G iPod Video players supported gapless playback together with the 2G Nanos. While I see "Skip-free playback" as feature of the new Nanos, it does not appear for the iPod Touch nor for iPod Classic. Does this mean that the "big" iPods lost the gapless playback feature?
Also, is the Shuffle a new series or did they just change colors? I see that the new Shuffles also support "Skip-free playback" now. Any idea if this can be added via firmware update to existing 2G Shuffles?
I sincerely doubt it. I think it's just that the Nanos and Shuffles didn't have it before, so it's a new feature. As the 6g iPod Classic and the iPod Touch are the siblings of the 5.5 generation, they inherit their feature set, i.e. gapless playback.
Also $200 off now on 8GB iPhone ($399 instead of $599)!
Don't forget 4GB iPhones are $299 on the refurb store while stocks last, and 8GB is $349.
and dont forget 160GB ipod classic is cheap compared to when I got my 60GB 5G one
Just ordered a 160 GB ipod, even though the new zune is just supposed to be around the corner. At this point, i sincerely doubt that ANYTHING microsoft can come up with will be able to match what apple has just done. The rumors claim that the new zune will have 80 gb hard drive-- which apple has had for quite some time now, and new zune "flash" based ones, which would have to be pretty friggin great to match up to the nano. I think microsoft's "zune" is now beyond hope.
I sincerely doubt it. I think it's just that the Nanos and Shuffles didn't have it before, so it's a new feature. As the 6g iPod Classic and the iPod Touch are the siblings of the 5.5 generation, they inherit their feature set, i.e. gapless playback.
2G Nano had it - like I said in my post which you obviously didn't read.
Can someone workout the Low frequency cutoff of the new ipod @ 32ohm headphone?
can somebody help me convince my wife that 900 pesos for an iPhone is a good investment?
Was just about to post the information mainly because I also have a question: the "old" 5.5G iPod Video players supported gapless playback together with the 2G Nanos. While I see "Skip-free playback" as feature of the new Nanos, it does not appear for the iPod Touch nor for iPod Classic. Does this mean that the "big" iPods lost the gapless playback feature?
Also, is the Shuffle a new series or did they just change colors? I see that the new Shuffles also support "Skip-free playback" now. Any idea if this can be added via firmware update to existing 2G Shuffles?
I am not sure about gapless playback for these newer devices. I would think that the 3G iPod nano and 1G iPod classic have gapless playback like their previous models. Both the new nano and iPod classic run a very similar (if not the same) firmware. The nano has the processor power for cover flow so I imagine it would more than have the processor power for gapless playback. As for the iPod touch, I am completely unaware and have not guesses about that as I don't know audio playback specs of the iPhone. If the iPhone has gapless audio playback then I imagine the iPod touch would as well.
I think the big surprise from all the announcements today was the $350 160GB iPod classic with 40 hours of audio playback time and 7 hours of video playback time. That is about $2.18 per GB, a cost that hasn't been seen in quite a bit of time. 160GB would be more than enough for some people to carry around their entire lossy or lossless libraries. With a 40 hour battery life, one could afford to lose 1/2 of that to listen to Apple lossless audio. I ordered my 160GB black iPod classic today.
I would have ordered the iPod touch but I think it is just too expensive, too early, and there isn't enough storage capacity. I realize that they are using NAND flash memory to fill the iPod touch and that is what makes it rather pricey (not to mention the display and wi-fi antenna) and that is also what limits their storage capacity but 16GB is just not enough to cut it for me. I also realize that if Apple added a hard drive to the iPod touch that it would be ridiculously thick as they would of had to add a much larger battery to get anywhere near 20 hours of audio playback.
I think the iPod touch is the future of iPods in that they will switch to a all flash memory system offering up touch screens, internet browsing, etc. I will just wait two years before purchasing a iPod like that. My 160GB iPod classic will more than last me as it is more than enough space for me to fit my full lossy library, music videos, movies, TV shows, and photos. Not to mention that I think it looks pretty slick and a lot more durable than the older 5G/5.5G iPods.
Of course they have gapless playback.
I sincerely doubt it. I think it's just that the Nanos and Shuffles didn't have it before, so it's a new feature. As the 6g iPod Classic and the iPod Touch are the siblings of the 5.5 generation, they inherit their feature set, i.e. gapless playback.
I had a 4 G nano hdd and a shuffle, both first generation that didn't support gapless.
I have a 4 G nano flash, second generation that already supports gapless.
I sincerely doubt it. I think it's just that the Nanos and Shuffles didn't have it before, so it's a new feature. As the 6g iPod Classic and the iPod Touch are the siblings of the 5.5 generation, they inherit their feature set, i.e. gapless playback.
I had a 4 G nano hdd and a shuffle, both first generation that didn't support gapless.
I have a 4 G nano flash, second generation that already supports gapless.
Actually, all iPod nanos use flash memory. Apple released the 1G iPod mini and 2G iPod mini (a year later), both of those used hard drives. Then Apple came out with the 1G iPod nano and 2G iPod nano (again, a year later) both of which used flash memory. Now the 3G iPod nano continues that flash memory trend.
As for the iPod shuffle (since I forgot to comment about them in my other post), I have a 2G shuffle and I don't think it has gapless audio playback. That is not what the iPod shuffle is marketed towards anyway.
Edit: Here is a time line for the smaller iPods:
2003 - 1G iPod mini (HDD based), it came in only one 4GB size.
2004 - 2G iPod mini (HDD based), it came in both 4GB and 6GB sizes.
2005 - 1G iPod nano (NAND flash based), it 1GB, 2GB, and 4GB sizes.
2006 - 2G iPod nano (NAND flash based) in 2GB, 4GB, and 8GB sizes.
2007 - 3G iPod nano (NAND flash) in 4GB and 8GB capacities.
Guys, I don't think "skip-free playback" has anything to do with gapless. I think it just means it's flash-based, so you can jog/exercise with them as opposed to the hard drive models.
I can't believe Apple is charging for ringtones. That's ludicrous. I can make my own ringtones for free for phones that can't even do video, and I get way better selection too.
Hi guys.
About new iPods: what are their S/N ratio and Total Harmonic Distortion (THD)?
Are they still use the Wolfson Dac (24 bit like the Wolfson Wm8750S in Teclast players?)?
Thanks
I can't believe Apple is charging for ringtones. That's ludicrous. I can make my own ringtones for free for phones that can't even do video, and I get way better selection too.
the ones charging are the music labels. They want us to belive that a ring tone is a totally different thing from the song you just bought. And even more. Most of the ringtones sell for 3 or 4 dollars.
I'm very dissapointed that there isn't a hard disc based iPod touch.
My 80 GB 5th gen iPod is nearly full, but I want to upgrade to something with a bigger screen. I don't really want to get an iPod classic 160 GB, because they will possibly introduce a hard disc based touch, and then I'll want that!
can somebody help me convince my wife that 900 pesos for an iPhone is a good investment?
...and how are you gonna use it in Arg? I'd be interested to know...
apparently disabling the subsidy lock involves high precision hardware skills ... wanna do two of them? :-)
Guys, I don't think "skip-free playback" has anything to do with gapless. I think it just means it's flash-based, so you can jog/exercise with them as opposed to the hard drive models.
Correct.
I can't believe Apple is charging for ringtones. That's ludicrous. I can make my own ringtones for free for phones that can't even do video, and I get way better selection too.
the ones charging are the music labels. They want us to belive that a ring tone is a totally different thing from the song you just bought. And even more. Most of the ringtones sell for 3 or 4 dollars.
Incredible...and some people keep buying them... who would have said the labels would start making less money on expensive recordings on CDs...and start making money with ridiculous monophonic tones? :-D
Gonza
I'll be picking up a 160GB Classic this weekend, can't wait to fit even more music I'll never listen to on it
I'll be picking up a 160GB Classic this weekend, can't wait to fit even more music I'll never listen to on it
But you COULD listen to it
And again, the prices in euros are ridiculous compared to those in US dollars. The 8GB nano sells in France for €174,75 (€209 tax-inclusive), which, at the current rate, is equivalent to $238.49 / $285.27, versus $199 (tax-exclusive) in the US.
The 8GB iPod Touch sells for €258.36 / €309 ($352.36 / $421.66) versus $299 (tax-exlusive), and the 16GB sells for €341.97 / €409 ($466.69 / $558.16), versus $399 (tax-exlusive).
I don't suppose these new ipods play FLAC files, do they?
No, neither do they play HE-AAC.
Should Rockbox still work on the new 160GB classic? They're still 5.5G, right?
I can't believe Apple is charging for ringtones. That's ludicrous. I can make my own ringtones for free for phones that can't even do video, and I get way better selection too.
There are two programs already out - one free (http://www.cocoadex.com/Ringtones_1.1.dmg), one not free (http://www.ambrosiasw.com/utilities/itoner/) (and I'm sure there are others) which allow you to add custom mp3 or AAC ringtones onto your iPhone.
Should Rockbox still work on the new 160GB classic? They're still 5.5G, right?
I don't imagine so, the hardware will be completely different to support the new OS. Does anyone know if it's true that they are running OS X?
The Touch yes, but I don't think it's the case for Shuffle, Nano and Classic.
Should Rockbox still work on the new 160GB classic? They're still 5.5G, right?
I would wait and see. It seems it can output a progressive scan image (up to 576p), and that it may work at higher H.264 AVC bitrates than the old 5.5G. That would suggest it has significantly upgraded electronics, and thus may not work with the current rockbox effort, although I doubt the changes are drastic.
Wait about two days, and there will be disections all over the internet.
Great. Someone on Wikipedia has taken the liberty of calling the new 80GB and 160GB "sixth-generation" but I don't think that's anything official.
Well, it does have a new UI, a new enclosure, etc... so I say 6th Gen is acceptable.
I don't think the iPod classic is a new generation iPod. Before, Apple always called the full sized iPod an iPod. There was that one time when they released the iPod photo that they called it a different name. Other than that, they have always just called it an iPod.
Now they gave it a new name, the iPod classic. I would call these newer iPod classics by their name, they aren't 6G iPods. So the new iPods are still 2G iPod shuffle, 3G iPod nano, 1G iPod classic, and 1G iPod touch. If anything, that iPod touch deserves to be called the 6G iPod.
I think that the upgrades from a 5G/5.5G iPod to a iPod classic are enough for a whole new generation but Apple added that little classic tag at the end of the title thus making it a whole new iPod not even in the same category as the 5G/5.5G iPods. So the official single iPod name died and Apple is moving on.
And again, the prices in euros are ridiculous compared to those in US dollars. The 8GB nano sells in France for €174,75 (€209 tax-inclusive), which, at the current rate, is equivalent to $238.49 / $285.27, versus $199 (tax-exclusive) in the US.
The 8GB iPod Touch sells for €258.36 / €309 ($352.36 / $421.66) versus $299 (tax-exlusive), and the 16GB sells for €341.97 / €409 ($466.69 / $558.16), versus $399 (tax-exlusive).
oh, but if you go the "currency convertion route", what about us, poor non-dollar-non-euro-non-pound, countries? For me is 1200 pesos de iPhone (1x3.2) :s
I will get the 80GB one. The battery in my 5th gen 30GB is dying.
160GB is still way too much for me. And I have over 1000CDs! And I don't feel like enconding at higher bitrates. V5 is enough for me.
Kinda off-topic: Does anyone know how can I add album art to my MP3? Eventually Apple will come out with a hard-drive based iPod Touch or I will get an iPhone and I want to take advantage of its album-cover browsing feature. Please help me on this.
it just reads any image file on the folder of the mp3s.
it just reads any image file on the folder of the mp3s.
Shouldn't it be better to embed? Any way to automate this process? Sorry, last question on this subject.
Now they gave it a new name, the iPod classic. I would call these newer iPod classics by their name, they aren't 6G iPods. So the new iPods are still 2G iPod shuffle, 3G iPod nano, 1G iPod classic, and 1G iPod touch. If anything, that iPod touch deserves to be called the 6G iPod.
I suppose it might really depend on the iPod's future. In 9-12 months, will Apple even offer anything like an iPod classic? If the touch will eventually use a hard disk, as the traditional iPod always has, and if the classic model is axed, will it lose the "touch" moniker? Would it then be the 7G iPod?
I'd say, to make it easier, the classic should be the 1G classic, and the touch should be the 1G touch. Then, if Apple decides to offer a later product solely called 'iPod", that'll be the 6G. Otherwise, we might end up back-tracking, calling certain iPods "true 6G" or what have you. Then again, what defines a "generation"?
I suppose it might really depend on the iPod's future. In 9-12 months, will Apple even offer anything like an iPod classic? If the touch will eventually use a hard disk, as the traditional iPod always has, and if the classic model is axed, will it lose the "touch" moniker? Would it then be the 7G iPod?
I'd say, to make it easier, the classic should be the 1G classic, and the touch should be the 1G touch. Then, if Apple decides to offer a later product solely called 'iPod", that'll be the 6G. Otherwise, we might end up back-tracking, calling certain iPods "true 6G" or what have you. Then again, what defines a "generation"?
I agree with you in the naming and I have no idea where Apple is going. Maybe they are phasing out the sole iPod name and going with different variations. The iPod classic might be the last hardware scroll wheel device that we see from Apple. In another year, they could very well release a 2G iPod touch that ends up replacing everything they have except for the iPod nano and iPod shuffle. Apple is throwing everyone for a loop here with the naming. At ilounge, people are arguing that all past generation iPods (ie the 1G, 2G, 4G, 4G photo, 5G, and 5.5G) are called iPod classic as that is what Steve Jobs said. That means that the recently released iPod classic would be known at the 6G iPod. I think they were taking his speech too literal though.
So I too will be calling the new iPods the 1G iPod touch and the 1G iPod classic.
I edited my previous post in this thread with this link, but am posting here so it can be seen by people reading the latest posts to the thread:
Apple and Steve Jobs are offering a $100 Apple store credit for previous iPhone purchasers (as a measure of "goodwill"):
http://www.apple.com/hotnews/openiphoneletter/ (http://www.apple.com/hotnews/openiphoneletter/)
Hi guys.
About new iPods: what are their S/N ratio and Total Harmonic Distortion (THD)?
Are they still use the Wolfson Dac (24 bit like the Wolfson Wm8750S in Teclast players?)?
Thanks
You might be intersted in this information that I've found on head-fi.org forums:
DAC and output stage info from Vinnie of Red Wine Audio, the author of iMod (http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=259258)
it just reads any image file on the folder of the mp3s.
Shouldn't it be better to embed? Any way to automate this process? Sorry, last question on this subject.
This is built into iTunes now, since version 7 iirc, though I think you have to provide an email address or credit card or something to sign up with the iTunes Store.
See "Fetching covers" on this page.
http://www.apple.com/itunes/jukebox/coverflow.html (http://www.apple.com/itunes/jukebox/coverflow.html)
Having said that, it's not perfect, just based on text matches so you might want to use some of the other services or just Amazon/Google image search to snag some. Getting it into iTunes is just drag'n'drop or cut and paste
The Apple pages list as minimum requirements for Windows systems XP or Vista. Has anyone tried if the new ipods still work on Win2k?
It is unknown if the iPods will work with Windows 2000 using 3rd party software. However, iTunes 7.4 simply will not install and won't work with Win2k. So right now, the new iPods cannot work under Windows 2000. There might be some 3rd party programs that come out later down the line but nothing is known right now.
Many people on iLounge are complaining about that but I don't think it is a big deal. Windows 2000 was released 7-8 years ago (I remember buying a PC back in 1999 that came with Windows 2000) so it is pretty old. Most of the PC market is running Windows XP and newer computers are running Vista. I don't think Apple is asking too much from their users by requiring them to spend less than $100 to upgrade to Windows XP Pro.
Then again, many people have been running Windows 2000 for many, many years now and are happy with it. I guess we can't expect Apple to support the aged OS forever.
It is unknown if the iPods will work with Windows 2000 using 3rd party software.
With my current iPod I am using Red Chair's Anapod. You can find this at http://www.redchairsoftware.com/anapod/featpw.php (http://www.redchairsoftware.com/anapod/featpw.php). It has the added benefit of being able to move mp3s back to the hard disc which was the prime reason I bought it to begin with. I don't know whether the program has been updated to include the latest batch of iPods, but they say they support all of them.
Many people on iLounge are complaining about that but I don't think it is a big deal. Windows 2000 was released 7-8 years ago (I remember buying a PC back in 1999 that came with Windows 2000) so it is pretty old. Most of the PC market is running Windows XP and newer computers are running Vista. I don't think Apple is asking too much from their users by requiring them to spend less than $100 to upgrade to Windows XP Pro.
Then again, many people have been running Windows 2000 for many, many years now and are happy with it. I guess we can't expect Apple to support the aged OS forever.
Microsoft still supports it, so in my opinion it could be supported by thrid party developers as well. Then again, it is Apple's choice whether they'll support it or not...
Hi guys.
About new iPods: what are their S/N ratio and Total Harmonic Distortion (THD)?
Are they still use the Wolfson Dac (24 bit like the Wolfson Wm8750S in Teclast players?)?
Thanks
You might be intersted in this information that I've found on head-fi.org forums:
DAC and output stage info from Vinnie of Red Wine Audio, the author of iMod (http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=259258)
This "Vinnie" is a joke.
He said he couldn't even do any fast A/B switching let alone it being a double blind test.
quotes like "I've only spent around 1 to 2 hours of listening to these two units, but so far I already prefer the sound of the iMod 5.5G with Vcap dock... there is a little more weight in the bottom and the top-end is a little warmer/sweeter sounding. The 6G is a little thinner sounding in comparison." Classic audiophile speak. I just googled what a Vcap dock is and it's some snakeoil voodoo black box costing $390 plus S/H.
(http://www.audiolineout.net/images/Vcap-and-cable.jpg)
He's obviously very invested in this magical black box he's paid $390 for and now all the other idiots in that thread are taking it as gospel that the iPod has subpar quality just because he used a lot of big words like sinewave and push-pull output stage. Uggh.
GOT my iPod 160GB today. cleaned my itunes libary/mp3 files so cant wait to go home and fill it up... I will do a little audio test with my shure "high end" headphones and my mp3 collection but I am sure I wont find any difference
wait 7 hours
Windows 2000 was released 7-8 years ago...we can't expect Apple to support the aged OS forever.
The other side of the argument is:
- XP is only 20 months "newer" than 2000, a time frame that pales in comparison to over six years of runtime for both.
- Architecturally (and practically), there is little difference between 2000 and XP. You'll find many more differences between OS 10.1 and 10.4, which spans less than 2000's and XP's reign. To be fair, Apple supports old versions of Windows better than old versions of OS X. Even 10.3, less than four years old, is close to useless now.
- 2000 still has a sizable install base (though not in the consumer sector).
- It just isn't that much effort to support 2000. If it were, every other program wouldn't do it. Other than Apple, Microsoft is the only company which comes to mind that puts unnecessary restrictions on operating system versions (for selfish reasons on their part).
I just googled what a Vcap dock is and it's some snakeoil voodoo black box costing $390 plus S/H.
I prefer this version:
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.p...43925.msg397023 (http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.php?topic=43925.msg397023)
What is it with "audiophiles" and molded plastic clashing hideously with outdated wood design? My favorite is seeing an 80s style dull silver turntable connected to a giant wooden amplifier six inches away. If you're gonna pay tens of thousands of dollars for audio equipment, at least buy stuff that looks nice together.
Another thing: what is it with "burn-in"? What does this even mean in the context of modern electronics? Do people really believe that "accelerating burn-in with 24/7 linear power" will "increase the dimensionality" of their music? Are they even aware that "linear power" means "convert voltage with simple transformer"?
The ridiculous dancing smileys aren't convincing me I should drop $400 on $10 of electronics and wood. The thing looks like a giant door stop.
lets keep the discussion on ipods not "magic" audio components.
My Classic review:
So i filled it up (took ages at@10MB a second I think) and so far so good. the static hissing sound is much lower then the previous ipods but it was not something you heard anyway when actually listening to music not pausing music.
Audio quality: cannot hear a difference really. I used several songs and swaped between my previous 60GB ipod and this one listing to metal, classical, jazz and bjork... oh I used E500PTH / SE530PTH headphones. Oh the songs are lame v-2 or higher normally.
The rest: mhh just an ipod. nice gui, cover flow seems to work OK (don't know how many albums I have but I am impressed it fetches artwork so quickly when scrolling madly).
The only thing which I am having issues with is when scrolling fast sometimes the "alphabet" jumping features works sometimes not... odd.
My conclusion: Best ipod so far, especially for price and 160GB storage (actually 149GB)
lets keep the discussion on ipods not "magic" audio components.
My Classic review:
<snip>
My 160 gb classic ipod has a slight lag when i go from say, the genre menu to the main menu or from the album menu to the main menu. Does your ipod display the same lag too? (FYI: I have loaded it with ~60 gb of music, all with album arts.) It seems that the "cover display" thing in the main menu is the reason for the delay.
It is unknown if the iPods will work with Windows 2000 using 3rd party software.
With my current iPod I am using Red Chair's Anapod. You can find this at http://www.redchairsoftware.com/anapod/featpw.php (http://www.redchairsoftware.com/anapod/featpw.php). It has the added benefit of being able to move mp3s back to the hard disc which was the prime reason I bought it to begin with. I don't know whether the program has been updated to include the latest batch of iPods, but they say they support all of them.
Ah OK, so if I use Anapod or e.g. a music player like Winamp that supports syncing to portables, I can fill up the iPod also WITHOUT having iTunes installed on my computer, right? (Of course, provided that these third party tools are updated to work with the newest iPods, but they probably will, won't they?)
ipod sound measurements
http://homepage.mac.com/marc.heijligers/au...asurements.html (http://homepage.mac.com/marc.heijligers/audio/ipod/comparison/measurements/measurements.html)
The audible impact is significant, and a firmware correction (most Codecs contain programmable parts) is definitely required to bring back the iPod sound quality to normal levels.
well i did a little audio test (listening) and can only notice higher highs (lol sorry).
used my asus xonar audio card and ipod and listened to some songs samples and swaped between both outputs on the fly listening to the same song samples.
seriously though the ipod does not sound "bad" or anything to me, still sounds amazing considering its an mp3 player and I am using earphones
Update: some german guy:
(http://www.hds-foto.de/forum/Vergleich_iPod_5_5G_zu_classic.jpg) belasted means mhh like using high independance headphones and the ipod got problems driving it.
Microsoft still supports it, so in my opinion it could be supported by thrid party developers as well. Then again, it is Apple's choice whether they'll support it or not...
No they don't. Trust me, I work in IT at a company desparately trying to upgrade to XP because all the vendors have stopped releasing software that supports it, too.
Time to upgrade.
Ah OK, so if I use Anapod or e.g. a music player like Winamp that supports syncing to portables, I can fill up the iPod also WITHOUT having iTunes installed on my computer, right? (Of course, provided that these third party tools are updated to work with the newest iPods, but they probably will, won't they?)
I don't have iTunes on my computer, so I can safely say: yes. As for the question will it work with the latest batch... They say it will, but I don't see the new ones explicitly mentioned while the older ones are. The last time I updated was in August 2007, and I see there's a newer version out. This could indicate that they have altered the program to support the new ones. (Dunno, and as I don't have one, can't test.)
I use Anapod for all my iPod needs. If needed you may need the Apple Updater for new firmware or real emergency recovery, but for all the rest (transfer to and from, creating/editing playlists, etc.) I use Anapod.
No they don't.
Who is they? If they is Microsoft, then you should look at the Support Lifecycle Pages as that clearly indicates the extended support goes on until 13 July in 2010.
Trust me, I work in IT at a company desparately trying to upgrade to XP because all the vendors have stopped releasing software that supports it, too.
I work in IT as well, but I am not forcing people to upgrade. On the other hand I haven't seen any other company not supporting Win 2000. It might be that tailormade software companies are creating software for a limited range of platforms but that is understandable.
Time to upgrade.
I am, once Leopard is out.
No they don't.
Who is they? If they is Microsoft, then you should look at the Support Lifecycle Pages as that clearly indicates the extended support goes on until 13 July in 2010.
"During the Extended Support phase, Microsoft continues to provide security hot fixes and paid support but no longer provides complimentary support options, design change requests, and non-security hotfixes."
Sounds like legacy software to me.
3. What is the difference between mainstream support, extended support, and online self-help support?
Support provided Mainstream support phase Extended support phase
Paid support (per-incident, per hour, and others) X X
Security update support X X
Non-security hotfix support X Requires extended hotfix agreement, purchased within 90 days of mainstream support ending.
No-charge incident support X
Warranty claims X
Design changes and feature requests X
Product-specific information that is available by using the online Microsoft Knowledge Base X X
Product-specific information that is available by using the Support site at Microsoft Help and Support to find answers to technical questions X X
These are the only changes I can find. I can understand that warranty and design changes aren't being followed up on, and that non-security support is shaky is shaky in itself. The system is stable enough to predictably not get any new problems, but I doubt that if MS changes something to cause massive blue screens there will not be serious resistance if all they say is buy the new one.
Also I am not in the mood to let this become a you say this, I say that recurring feature, so this is the last thing from my side on this issue. All I know is that a huge percentage of my customers still use Windows 2000 on their computers and Microsoft will not be able to force a big multinational to invest several hundreds of thousands of euros because they want everyone on Vista (hell! Some of them are still on Windows 98!). Are you already running Vista? After all, one and a half year from now XP will be bye bye to in your reckoning...
Does anyone know if the new gen of Ipod's still have the problem with eq causing distortion on certain settings?
Does anyone know if the new gen of Ipod's still have the problem with eq causing distortion on certain settings?
Well, every equalizer causes distortion if the frequencies are cranked up to a level where clipping occurs. Hence, to what specific problem are you referring to?
Ah OK, so if I use Anapod or e.g. a music player like Winamp that supports syncing to portables, I can fill up the iPod also WITHOUT having iTunes installed on my computer, right? (Of course, provided that these third party tools are updated to work with the newest iPods, but they probably will, won't they?)
Yes, that is correct. I think some 3rd party apps have already been upgraded to support the 3G iPod nano and iPod classic (forget about iPod touch support). The only problem with 3rd party apps is that you don't get full syncing, they can only really sync music to the iPod. If you want video, game, and photo syncing then you must use iTunes.
Does anyone know if the new gen of Ipod's still have the problem with eq causing distortion on certain settings?
Well, every equalizer causes distortion if the frequencies are cranked up to a level where clipping occurs. Hence, to what specific problem are you referring to?
Settings like "electronic" on the 5.5 ipods caused horrible distortion no matter what volume you set the ipod to, presumably due to shoddy coding.