Hard Drive iPod

[natrino]

I cant understand why the they didnt do a hard drive based ipod touch now i know its packing a touch screen wi-fi internet etc but what with its 3.5'' display surely its more of a movie player. then theres the wi-fi makes it a portable PC, when you consider 160GB is probably going to be used more for video then music why have a 2.5' when you could have a 3.5'' for video just dont understand why they didnt make it slightly thicker and have a hard drive. plus isnt it more expensive to make flash players then hard drive players?

[Gunner]

I cant understand why the they didnt do a hard drive based ipod touch now i know its packing a touch screen wi-fi internet etc but what with its 3.5'' display surely its more of a movie player. then theres the wi-fi makes it a portable PC, when you consider 160GB is probably going to be used more for video then music why have a 2.5' when you could have a 3.5'' for video just dont understand why they didnt make it slightly thicker and have a hard drive. plus isnt it more expensive to make flash players then hard drive players?

It's simple, Steve Jobs hates you Billy. He hates you.

[bjack913]

Battery life.

[a113524c]

Battery life, size, reliability issues. I think it was smart for apple to switch to flash, once higher capacities become cheaper we will all be glad they made the switch.

[Dogenzaka]

Battery life.

If the 160GB iPod classic can handle a freakin' 160GB HDD and maintain a 9 hour video battery life and almost 50 hours of audio, why can't Apple design a similar high-end battery for the touch, and implement a HDD, hmm?

reliability issues.

30GB iPod Video now for 2 years and no problems.
Your iPod will crap out on you if you treat it like crap :p

[Gunner]

If the 160GB iPod classic can handle a freakin' 160GB HDD and maintain a 9 hour video battery life and almost 50 hours of audio, why can't Apple design a similar high-end battery for the touch, and implement a HDD, hmm?



30GB iPod Video now for 2 years and no problems.
Your iPod will crap out on you if you treat it like crap :p

Come on now. The classic is like three times as thick as the ipod touch and has a screen half the size. Of course it gets better batterly life.

[Dogenzaka]

Come on now. The classic is like three times as thick as the ipod touch and has a screen half the size. Of course it gets better batterly life.

I would have easily traded the thickness for more capacity and battery life.
Even then, with the bigger screen, I'm sure a battery designed like the classic's for the touch would have made it better than it is now :p

[haveyoumetmark]

I just think Apple made the switch to NAND memory too early in the game -- even though they are known for being ahead of the their time. My gen 4 iPod with clickwheel lasted me two years before the HDD had a failure, then the dead iPod images and endless HDD clicking would not cease.

[Dogenzaka]

So what if it's the future?
If the NES played CD ROMs instead of cartridges, it would have failed. Why? Cartridges, yeah, had less memory, but they were actually affordable. CDs had more memory but they were so expensive it wasn't worth it.

Apple shouldn't have incorporated flash into a major iPod so early in the flash's lifecycle. Remember when DVDs were freaking expensive? Now they're dirt cheap.

[haveyoumetmark]

That's what I'm saying in some respects. It was a little too early.