Apple Rumors: Intel iBooks, Tiny iPods, Tiered iTunes
Posted by Harry McCracken | Thursday, November 17, 2005 7:22 PM PT
In September and October, Apple scheduled press events and thereby set off a flurry of entertaining speculation about what it was going to announce (which turned out to be the iPod Nano and video iPod, among other new products). It's November, and there's absolutely no evidence that Apple's going to have a big event to launch anything at all this month. So here are three unconfirmed, could-be-wildly-off-the-mark Apple rumors from today's news:
Think Secret seems really confident that Apple will release entry-level iBook laptops based on Intel chips at January's Macworld Expo show. (There certainly
will be Intel iBooks at some point, but Think Secret has a history of being spot-on in some cases and completely wrong in others, so the details are still in question.)
Apple Insider and other sides are discussing an
alleged update to the iPod Shuffle that'll supposedly keep similar storage capacities and prices, but be even smaller, and available in more than one color. (Call it the iPod Nanoshuffle.)
And lastly, Forbes has a story in which the head of music behemoth EMI predicts that
Apple will drop its 99-cent iTunes song pricing in favor of a tiered pricing scheme, with popuar songs going for more than a buck and less in-demand ones going for cheap. (Most of the music I buy is old and obscure, so I wouldn't necessarily squawk at such a shift. You?)
Apple almost never tips its hand, so we won't know the truth about any of these prognostications until (and unless) they happen...
I hope Apple doesn't go with this new pricing scheme, at least for awhile. I never buy individual songs on iTunes, only albums. At $9.99 I save 5-7 bucks per CD. If that raises too much I'll just spend the extra couple bucks to get the CD at a store. If apple allows these record labels to raise the prices per song at this stage in the game, it could kill online music stores. Steve Jobs is the only man that can hold them back.
I think it doesn't matter what apple charges for a song as long as they keep videos at $1.99. I mean they can charge whatever they want for songs ... I'll just download a free (illegal) version (thanks EMI). I seriously doubt that Apple will release a new laptop on Intel as they had stated they will not make the switch until late in 06 and although the chip speeds are slow for the G4's...they are not bad considering the great battery life so I see less of an urgent need there. Really what Apple needs is a 2+GB memory and faster HD's for the laptops (these things are tripping the system more than slow CPU crunching). Regarding the shuffle...never liked it and I think they should just kill it in favor of the nano, period.
I'm beginning to doubt if Apple has fully comprehended the switch to a CISC processor, how will the OSX programs run on these new Intel-based processors?
Apple had good intentions by moving over to Intel, due to the Mac's inherently slow FSB, but I believe they failed to realize that these are completely different processors and the coding is very different. Either the Mac OSX is going to have to be emulated, which will greatly slow software down, or they will end the platform altogether. Image having to rebuy all your favorite software because you're buying your all white, post-modern apple computer...
I like toast.
Apple has been creating Intel versions of there Mac software internally, for a while. I'm sure they knnow what there doing. The have been planning this move for a while now.
yeah, stooge. have you not read how the x86 version of OSX that was sent to developers is actually in some cases performing better than the the powerpc version?
as for applications, yes, it's true, it will be harder for developers to change over?but hey, they had to do that for the OS9 to OSX transition, and look at how much better off we are because of it :)
I don't know much about the nuts and bolts of how an OS works, but I do know the difference between the RISC and CISC computing models, and I'm sure Apple knows better than I do. They have a whole bunch of engineer types that look in to this sort of thing. As for efficency on a CISC chip, look into Debian Linux running on any Pentium chip. For that matter, look at one of my servers running an SCO UNIX Kernel complied in '92 on a 386SX. Runs the job costing, timeclocks, and 15 TTY terminals for a whole commercial printing operation. I run dozens of apps that can cross compile for OSx, WinAnything, linux or Palm. I think the road will be a smoother one for Apple than many are imagining. I also like toast.
here's what i think. DVB-H live TV and radio tuners, with DVR capability in the iPod video. Tear down reveals a Broadcomm video h. 264 processor chip in the iPod video. Broadcomm just bought Athena which makes a DVBH receiver chip. Broadcomm would have the inside track, as it is already "inside"...
I'm rather disgusted by James NYC's admission that he will knowlingly download illegal music files.
Doesn't anyone know the definition of stealing anymore?
I download music "illegally", so sue me. Oh wait, I can't be sued.
Stealing is okay if you are stealing from an evil organization.
Stealing: Removal of property with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of its use.
What I'd like to see on an iPod in the future is on the go, wireless sharing. If you've used the newer version of iTunes you know that you can listen to other users' shared music. Would it be impossible to bring this to iPod? Apple is already into the whole 'media streaming throughout your house' thing. I guess they could accomplish this by making iPods WiFi enabled, or perhaps it could be done over a short-range Bluetooth network - eliminating the need for a wireless hotspot. You could listen to whatever the other passengers on the bus or train are!
Intel/PPC: As things go, x86 processors are now very much RISC processors, as I was told recently. You can't actually tell the difference between the processors any more! Apple have been compiling OS X on Intel processors since before its initial PPC release. Also, the point of releasing developer machines early was to enable the switch for software houses. Apple never announces early if they can help it!
Music: It'll be interesting to see how Apple manage with this one. Knowing they're normal stance on this (and EMI's recent behaviour) Apple won't budged on this unless they're forced to by licensing/pricing from the record labels. It's no different to food manufacturer putting prices up, forcing the supermarket to concede.
iPod: WiFi works ad-hoc, and this would be faster than Bluetooth. Certainly a good idea. Apple really need to increase the capacity of the nano if it's really going to replace the mini though - 6GB minis existed just before their withdrawal. Backwards step, no?
err, the Nano wasn't quite a backwards step, i've yet to see any other competitors offering 4gigs of Flash in a player that is pencil thin.
Intel topic: Steve Jobs said that they have secretly been testing every OS released on Intel chips - so they've been working for 5+ years now....plus, he used an Intel-chip based iMac at his keynote speech a few months ago....you are ignorant to say the OS will be changed bc of the Intel switch
iPod: expect a wireless iPod with Sirius satellite radio in it within the next year. If not Sirius, then a wireless iPod for sure