6 ms·

Steve @ Apple keynote--iTunes 9, new iPods (w/vid camera!), 50M iPhone + iPods

37 points by sama 17y ago

ujjwalg 17y ago
I have been messing with genius for music in my iPhone and feel that pandora does a much better job. It might be because genius has limited options and has to search for songs within the library you own, but still, I have seen very weird/not pertinent genius recommendations. I hope the app genius recommendation is better.
- unalone 17y ago
  Since they're updating Genius today, I'm curious to see if there are any significant improvements. LP looks terrific.
- tvon 17y ago
  I like Pandora for playing music I don't already have, but usually it seems to end up in a ~20 track loop (I made that number up, but I feel like I hear the same songs a lot). Granted, I have only made a few Pandora stations, and have only made a few Genius playlists, and both were used for "gym" music like Beastie Boys, Eminem, etc., so it's not like I'm pushing any limits here... I guess I'm saying that the new music from Pandora is a big win. Now imagine if Genius could mix in streams of music you don't own, while giving you an option to buy tracks with a click... that would be a killer feature.
  - pohl 17y ago
    I had the same problem with Pandora, and ultimately realized that you need to seed your channel with a large, diverse collection of artists in order to avoid getting trapped in a small loop like that. I don't want to futz with setting up channels that much, though. Still, I've discovered some good music with it.
    - potatolicious 17y ago
      Disclaimer: I don't work for these guys. I've found thesixtyone.com to be AWESOME for discovering good, indie music. It's got a very social-networky-MMO sort of feel to it and is really well structured to trying new music.
      - pyre 17y ago
        Isn't a disclaimer for when you do 'work for these guys?'
        pohl 17y ago
        That's how one usually sees it, but really a disclaimer is just "a statement that denies something, especially responsibility". So one could read the grandparent as 1) denying that he works for them 2) denying that he would know as much about the service as someone who did, and 3) denying that he has any conflict of interest that would call his assessment of the service into question.
    - gojomo 17y ago
      That's a good tip. Also, if you down-rate or snooze a lot of tracks, a station starts to wander more from its core tracks. But it's still disappointing that a station seeded from a a single artist won't at least put all of their tracks in rotation, instead staying tightly around their best-known/best-liked sound. (I think Pandora is a little too proud of their 'music genome' typing project.)
      - tweaqslug 17y ago
        Agreed, Pandora can get a bit one dimensional if you're not diligent. I've heard it's best to upvote sparingly and downvote heavily if you want a good mix. Also adding multiple bands and/or songs to a channel helps.
philwelch 17y ago
Good. A lot of speculation Steve would stop doing these, but it's a good portion of his job to turn on the charisma for the press and the pubic.
unalone 17y ago
Curious that the nano gets a camera, and a video camera at that, but the touch doesn't.
- Poiesis 17y ago
  I figured they didn't have a lot of extra room in the case. Not that the Nano seems to, either. Edit: or the rumored manufacturing delays made them delay the announcement.
  - unalone 17y ago
    I guess. I'm just used to Apple magically being able to stick anything they want to inside a nearly nonexistent depth.
    - pyre 17y ago
      Well, I wouldn't hold my breath for an electron microscope or portable DNA sequencer in the next iPhone upgrade... There are limitations to technology. Apple just hires top-end engineers and designers and forces them to work together to meet tight requirements, but they still need to be based in reality.
- swilliams 17y ago
  My wild guess is that they feel it would cannibalize sales from the phone? Cramming all the other features (FM, pedometer, camera/video) into the nano will make menu navigation pretty complicated though.
  - pchristensen 17y ago
    Bingo. Nano competes with standard devices but isn't expandable through the AppStore. Touch gives you internet, AppStore but is hardware limited (no radio, camera, mic). Have to buy the iPhone + contract to get both. I was dreaming of a touch with a speaker + mic so I could use Skype + MiFi.
phony_identity 17y ago
Poor Steve is so thin. Can't tell you how sad this makes me.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
avner 17y ago
The very omission of the camera from the Ipod touch makes me wonder what their design team was thinking. Sticking a camera on the ipod nano adds no value to it than the camera on my old samsung cell phone. A camera on the touch would have probably destroyed the market for some devices and disrupted Apple's own iphone line.
- pyre 17y ago
  > The very omission of the camera from the Ipod touch makes me wonder what their design team was thinking. > A camera on the touch would have probably [...] disrupted Apple's own iphone line. I think that you answered you own question.
  - roc 17y ago
    It seems unlikely that adding a camera to a non-phone would somehow disrupt sales for a phone. Particularly when the phone is billed primarily as an all-in-wonder convergence device. A camera on an ipod touch doesn't somehow remove the flip-phone from your pocket. And leaving it off isn't going to do much to convince people looking at something sold primarily as having 'no contract' to instead get a phone with a relatively steep contract. I bet the guys at Pure Digital let out a huge sigh when Norah Jones took the stage.
  - odvious 17y ago
    This was my initial thought as well, but I just can't see myself saying "Hmm.. no camera in the iPod, guess I'll have to get the iPhone instead and just not use the phone part of it." I doubt the camera functionality would ever be enough to push people into the cost of a new phone (contracts, initial outlay, etc.).
    - pyre 17y ago
      I'm not saying I agree with the logic or that it makes sense in the real world... I'm sure there is a lot of RDF in Cupertino. Not necessarily from Steve Jobs, but just from being too much of a mono-culture. I don't know if it's still the case, but IIRC the iPod Touch didn't have Bluetooth support while the iPhone did. I can hardly think that Bluetooth support would be enough to push someone to the iPhone from the iPod Touch... Even back in the day, I remember things like Apple limiting the capabilities of the video card in the iBook so that it would only support mirroring through the external VGA adapter, even though the video card supported adding an extra monitor as a separate display. (This was demonstrated when someone hacked around the limiation in the OpenFirmware or driver, can't remember) Apple does this stuff all the time in order to draw distinct lines in the sand between where one product's features end and the other's begins. It's most apparent between the iBook/MacBook and PowerBook/MacBookPro lines dating back to the PPC days. There were many features they were excluded from the 'consumer' model (iBook/MacBook) that were present in the 'professional' model (PowerBook/MacBook Pro) that were not enough for a lot of people to pay the extra $700+ for the upgrade. I've never thought that it made too much sense in a lot of cases, but it's an ingrained philosophy in Apple's marketing/product design dating back years. I would hardly expect them to end it now.
unalone 17y ago
Anybody downloaded iTunes 9 yet? It's grotesque. It feels much snappier, which I like, but the new non-Leopard theme feels like a satire on Apple product. Massive overgradients.
- xal 17y ago
  yea same. That theme must have happened while steve was in the hospital.
- chris24 17y ago
  Let's just hope that Apple doesn't decide to adopt that as a new standard for the next iteration of OS X, like they did with the iTunes sidebar...
  - unalone 17y ago
    God, I know. I lost faith in Apple's taste a little bit when I downloaded that. I love the new mini-scrollers, I love the playback bar that looks like Quicktime X, but the gloss is obnoxious.
- ComputerGuru 17y ago
  Yep. The new, white UI is atrocious. I grabbed a screenshot (even signed up for twitpic just to share my anger): http://twitpic.com/h48v1 http://twitpic.com/h48v1
- tvon 17y ago
  I wouldn't quite call it grotesque but it does not quite seem like it was "Designed by Apple of California". It has a bizarrely excessive 3D look that reminds me of the default Firefox OSX theme, much less subtle than previous versions. It's also has more of a plastic look than a metal look. Other items of note (if you care about these things): * They fixed the "zoom" button (no longer toggles the mini player, which always irked me as being wildly inconsistent) * They now use a white background instead of a black in many places. It's more Macbook and less Macbook Pro.
paulreiners 17y ago
And the Beatles tomorrow (never knows)?

37 points by sama 17y ago

I have been messing with genius for music in my iPhone and feel that pandora does a much better job. It might be because genius has limited options and has to search for songs within the library you own, but still, I have seen very weird/not pertinent genius recommendations. I hope the app genius recommendation is better.

unalone 17y ago
Since they're updating Genius today, I'm curious to see if there are any significant improvements. LP looks terrific.
tvon 17y ago
I like Pandora for playing music I don't already have, but usually it seems to end up in a ~20 track loop (I made that number up, but I feel like I hear the same songs a lot). Granted, I have only made a few Pandora stations, and have only made a few Genius playlists, and both were used for "gym" music like Beastie Boys, Eminem, etc., so it's not like I'm pushing any limits here... I guess I'm saying that the new music from Pandora is a big win. Now imagine if Genius could mix in streams of music you don't own, while giving you an option to buy tracks with a click... that would be a killer feature.
- pohl 17y ago
  I had the same problem with Pandora, and ultimately realized that you need to seed your channel with a large, diverse collection of artists in order to avoid getting trapped in a small loop like that. I don't want to futz with setting up channels that much, though. Still, I've discovered some good music with it.
  - potatolicious 17y ago
    Disclaimer: I don't work for these guys. I've found thesixtyone.com to be AWESOME for discovering good, indie music. It's got a very social-networky-MMO sort of feel to it and is really well structured to trying new music.
    - pyre 17y ago
      Isn't a disclaimer for when you do 'work for these guys?'
      - pohl 17y ago
        That's how one usually sees it, but really a disclaimer is just "a statement that denies something, especially responsibility". So one could read the grandparent as 1) denying that he works for them 2) denying that he would know as much about the service as someone who did, and 3) denying that he has any conflict of interest that would call his assessment of the service into question.
  - gojomo 17y ago
    That's a good tip. Also, if you down-rate or snooze a lot of tracks, a station starts to wander more from its core tracks. But it's still disappointing that a station seeded from a a single artist won't at least put all of their tracks in rotation, instead staying tightly around their best-known/best-liked sound. (I think Pandora is a little too proud of their 'music genome' typing project.)
    - tweaqslug 17y ago
      Agreed, Pandora can get a bit one dimensional if you're not diligent. I've heard it's best to upvote sparingly and downvote heavily if you want a good mix. Also adding multiple bands and/or songs to a channel helps.

philwelch 17y ago

Good. A lot of speculation Steve would stop doing these, but it's a good portion of his job to turn on the charisma for the press and the pubic.

unalone 17y ago

Curious that the nano gets a camera, and a video camera at that, but the touch doesn't.

Poiesis 17y ago
I figured they didn't have a lot of extra room in the case. Not that the Nano seems to, either. Edit: or the rumored manufacturing delays made them delay the announcement.
- unalone 17y ago
  I guess. I'm just used to Apple magically being able to stick anything they want to inside a nearly nonexistent depth.
  - pyre 17y ago
    Well, I wouldn't hold my breath for an electron microscope or portable DNA sequencer in the next iPhone upgrade... There are limitations to technology. Apple just hires top-end engineers and designers and forces them to work together to meet tight requirements, but they still need to be based in reality.
swilliams 17y ago
My wild guess is that they feel it would cannibalize sales from the phone? Cramming all the other features (FM, pedometer, camera/video) into the nano will make menu navigation pretty complicated though.
- pchristensen 17y ago
  Bingo. Nano competes with standard devices but isn't expandable through the AppStore. Touch gives you internet, AppStore but is hardware limited (no radio, camera, mic). Have to buy the iPhone + contract to get both. I was dreaming of a touch with a speaker + mic so I could use Skype + MiFi.

phony_identity 17y ago

Poor Steve is so thin. Can't tell you how sad this makes me.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

avner 17y ago

The very omission of the camera from the Ipod touch makes me wonder what their design team was thinking. Sticking a camera on the ipod nano adds no value to it than the camera on my old samsung cell phone. A camera on the touch would have probably destroyed the market for some devices and disrupted Apple's own iphone line.

pyre 17y ago
> The very omission of the camera from the Ipod touch makes me wonder what their design team was thinking. > A camera on the touch would have probably [...] disrupted Apple's own iphone line. I think that you answered you own question.
- roc 17y ago
  It seems unlikely that adding a camera to a non-phone would somehow disrupt sales for a phone. Particularly when the phone is billed primarily as an all-in-wonder convergence device. A camera on an ipod touch doesn't somehow remove the flip-phone from your pocket. And leaving it off isn't going to do much to convince people looking at something sold primarily as having 'no contract' to instead get a phone with a relatively steep contract. I bet the guys at Pure Digital let out a huge sigh when Norah Jones took the stage.
- odvious 17y ago
  This was my initial thought as well, but I just can't see myself saying "Hmm.. no camera in the iPod, guess I'll have to get the iPhone instead and just not use the phone part of it." I doubt the camera functionality would ever be enough to push people into the cost of a new phone (contracts, initial outlay, etc.).
  - pyre 17y ago
    I'm not saying I agree with the logic or that it makes sense in the real world... I'm sure there is a lot of RDF in Cupertino. Not necessarily from Steve Jobs, but just from being too much of a mono-culture. I don't know if it's still the case, but IIRC the iPod Touch didn't have Bluetooth support while the iPhone did. I can hardly think that Bluetooth support would be enough to push someone to the iPhone from the iPod Touch... Even back in the day, I remember things like Apple limiting the capabilities of the video card in the iBook so that it would only support mirroring through the external VGA adapter, even though the video card supported adding an extra monitor as a separate display. (This was demonstrated when someone hacked around the limiation in the OpenFirmware or driver, can't remember) Apple does this stuff all the time in order to draw distinct lines in the sand between where one product's features end and the other's begins. It's most apparent between the iBook/MacBook and PowerBook/MacBookPro lines dating back to the PPC days. There were many features they were excluded from the 'consumer' model (iBook/MacBook) that were present in the 'professional' model (PowerBook/MacBook Pro) that were not enough for a lot of people to pay the extra $700+ for the upgrade. I've never thought that it made too much sense in a lot of cases, but it's an ingrained philosophy in Apple's marketing/product design dating back years. I would hardly expect them to end it now.

unalone 17y ago

Anybody downloaded iTunes 9 yet? It's grotesque. It feels much snappier, which I like, but the new non-Leopard theme feels like a satire on Apple product. Massive overgradients.

xal 17y ago
yea same. That theme must have happened while steve was in the hospital.
chris24 17y ago
Let's just hope that Apple doesn't decide to adopt that as a new standard for the next iteration of OS X, like they did with the iTunes sidebar...
- unalone 17y ago
  God, I know. I lost faith in Apple's taste a little bit when I downloaded that. I love the new mini-scrollers, I love the playback bar that looks like Quicktime X, but the gloss is obnoxious.
ComputerGuru 17y ago
Yep. The new, white UI is atrocious. I grabbed a screenshot (even signed up for twitpic just to share my anger): http://twitpic.com/h48v1 http://twitpic.com/h48v1
tvon 17y ago
I wouldn't quite call it grotesque but it does not quite seem like it was "Designed by Apple of California". It has a bizarrely excessive 3D look that reminds me of the default Firefox OSX theme, much less subtle than previous versions. It's also has more of a plastic look than a metal look. Other items of note (if you care about these things): * They fixed the "zoom" button (no longer toggles the mini player, which always irked me as being wildly inconsistent) * They now use a white background instead of a black in many places. It's more Macbook and less Macbook Pro.

paulreiners 17y ago

And the Beatles tomorrow (never knows)?