And to round out the day’s hardware hands-ons we wrapped our mitts around the new iPod classic. It’s thin, it’s solid, but it’s still hard drive based, which for our flash-loving selves is kind of a bummer. But if you need to carry around 80 (or 160 friggin gigs) of media, and you like to use iPods, this is the new king of the hill on storage.[…] Thanks to 1KrazyKorean for providing this nice story on Digg.
What other users say about this:
tmcdigg: Don’t worry your $349 160gb ipod classic will be $149 in about 65 days!! LOL
Seriously, with all that space HOW COULD YOU NOT DO A WIFI/P2P APPLICATIONS FEATURE?!?!?
Stupid… your going to sync all your data with a FRIGGEN WIRE?!
stusb: i’m stoked. i love the ipod. love it. it’s one of the greatest inventions of this decade and i’m glad that the basic ipod form factor is still around. ipod lovers will lament the day the click wheel dies.
naonao: I’m more excited about this than the touch, replacing my 80GB with a 160.
counterpart9: so do you think there is any hardware limitations preventing this really nice looking user interface on the new iPod Classic to be put on an 5G iPod Video?
i know apple won’t do it, they want people to by new iPods, but it’d be very cool to just put the new UI on my iPod video.
emuprophet: I like how apple released two ipods that needed the other’s features. If I have 160gb of storage, I will need the touch’s faster browsing functions. If I have a touch, I wouldn’t need those enhanced browsing functions… unless I had 80gb+ of songs (16gb filled ipod classic can be quick to browse with a wheel) WTF apple?
ofenza: These metal iPods are ugly. What a step back…
And what’s with the divided screen?
coolharshal: After some time I realised that most of the features of iPod touch will be not that useful as its still a pain to use public WiFi hotspots. So, No web-browsing using Safari, No You-Tube videos and No online music downloads. And yes, there is no inbuilt Radio. But still I’ll wait for couple of months for a refurbished piece to appear on Apple site.
check out : http://way.to/ritw
wookiecookie88: Well that was an amazingly uninformative waste of my life.
NJPENSO: Yeah, I’ve seen that before, it’s called an ipod video.
No seriously, what’s the difference?
iJeffStudios: How about we digg the actual first story on digg that links to the same page 🙂
theprez: What I would like to know is if the new iPod Classic and iPhone Touch have video output capabilities. Outputting videos to a TV is a feature hardly anyone ever talks about, but it’s one of the main things I use my iPod for. Anybody know? How about the iPhone for that matter…?
cwoolf34: Good line up, but no 160 GB Touch? No way I am getting a classic, that is just another language for obsolete and being phased out.
rodrigo74: To me it looks like the designers spent all their time working on the Touch and left the junior team taking care of the rest of the iPod line..man, those things are fugly. The colors of the shuffle are horrible, the fat nano is weird as hell, and the classic looks weird. I’ll stick to my 5G and wait for the next generation, thanks.
LxRogue: “but it’s still hard drive based”
SO? Did they seriously expect 160GB of flash crammed into that? Is there even an advantage to having it entirely flash based?
iheartartoo: The sparkles make it look like a Bratz edition iPod or something.