Nanos are usually good to carry small collections of music and iPods good for entire libraries... that is using regular AAC. but I use Apple lossless, and that puts me on a different mindset than most people when cheking storage capacity for music players. For me, Nanos are a pretty useless thing; regular sized iPods are my Nanos, but I would love to some day carry my whole music collection with me using Apple Lossless. So, how long do you think it would take to see those 600GB Flash memory iPods (or something alike)?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPod 300GB & 600GB instead of 30GB & 60GB Ipods?
- Thread starter Alex Kornejo
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You can have one today. 600 GB of NAND flash memory at wholesale will cost $31,200, give or take. Plus a small matter of customization.Alex Kornejo said:
yeah I think your looking a good 10-20 years in the future here. Most people's computers top out at around 300gb and that's on the high end (excluding video professionals)
And unless they dropped the size to that of an SMT transistor... well lets just say it'll be a really big iPod.CanadaRAM said:
dejo said:
I reckon more like a milk crate with headphones.
$US 31,200 eh, what's that then....AUD$ 40,500. Not going to buy a luxury car with that sort of cash, might get you into a up-scale Commodore or Falcon but nothing really flashy. The best might be an Accord Euro but you'd be pushing it.
Now $40500 at the Apple Store......
Hey now, let's think about how fast technology is moving. I would bet still a long time, like 10 years, but I think if you would have told Steve Jobs he would have had a 60GB iPod that played video when he released the first one, he probably would have laughed out loud.
Checkmate.
Daniel.
Checkmate.
Daniel.
I think the issue is demand- how many people would need a 600GB ipod? I mean woah! It's insane. I think they'd lose money on such an expensive device with such limited demand
I mean woah! It's insane. I think they'd lose money on such an expensive device with such limited demand
I read an interview with the CEO of SanDisk who claimed that within 7-10 years they will be producing a 1 Terabyte Flash card the size of a current Compact Flash card. He said his engineers already have 50 and 100 GB cards on the design table.
celebrian23 - I for one would love a 600 GB iPod. I have 324 GB of music already and am planning on digitizing approx 1500 LP records. This in addition to the multiple hard drives of video I have add up to a lot of storage. I would love to have a true "home-pod" with my full home folder, music, videos, etc. on it. It'll come sooner than you think and with the growth of digital music, video, photography, etc. you can bet there will be a demand for it.
celebrian23 - I for one would love a 600 GB iPod. I have 324 GB of music already and am planning on digitizing approx 1500 LP records. This in addition to the multiple hard drives of video I have add up to a lot of storage. I would love to have a true "home-pod" with my full home folder, music, videos, etc. on it. It'll come sooner than you think and with the growth of digital music, video, photography, etc. you can bet there will be a demand for it.
Something simmilar today for around $30,000? Mmm...Well I DO love to walk around & I don't use a car that much anyway so... Very tempting offer, jajaja. I know that I got very fat out expectations, but the 50 years comment seems a little pesimistic isn't it? I mean personal computers have come a long way since they first came out and that hasn't been 50 years has it? Anyway, I'm reasonable in my expectations and 10 years is about what I expect to wait for something like that, 20 years on the other hand, I just hope that I don't have to wait that long, I still wanna be young for when something like that comes out.
About being a flash player, it doesnt have to be, I just don't want the annoying little stops that a HD makes from time to time, I hear nanos don't do that (but I wouldn't know since as I said I find them useless for me, but very very cool). I just want a simmilar technology, the thing is I also hear that flash players are not as delicate in movement and have no movable parts or something like that (I'm not a very tech savvy guy, sorry) which is a good thing for somebody like me.
I agree with celebrian23, in part the problem is demand, and 600gb seems like a whole lot just for music, but there are people filling out their 60gb ipods with regular AAC, if suddenly all those people started using lossless instead Nanos would have to be in the tens of GB range and ipod in the 100's to sastisfy demand and besides, people are using video now, people WILL find an use for that much memory, it wasn't that many years ago when I bought a 40GB VAIO and I was told by a family friend that that was way too much for a student, but multimedia consumes a whole lot of memory, specially if you want the highiest possible quality.
People just have to be a little more discerning & start using Lossless, but I guess that that's an uphill battle I'm even having problem convincing my sister to get a regular iPod instead of a Nano, but she insists that Nano is more than enough. I guess i'll have to show her the difference using Lossless with a good pair of IEM's instead of AAC with the stock ipod earphones.
Anyway, still atleast with the ipod i don't have to carry an enormous CD case with just a small part of my music collection and have the annoyiance of having to switch from one disk to another, but still, it will be nice when I don't have to make any kind of choice of taking part of my collection and leave another, And I know I'm not alone.
About being a flash player, it doesnt have to be, I just don't want the annoying little stops that a HD makes from time to time, I hear nanos don't do that (but I wouldn't know since as I said I find them useless for me, but very very cool). I just want a simmilar technology, the thing is I also hear that flash players are not as delicate in movement and have no movable parts or something like that (I'm not a very tech savvy guy, sorry) which is a good thing for somebody like me.
I agree with celebrian23, in part the problem is demand, and 600gb seems like a whole lot just for music, but there are people filling out their 60gb ipods with regular AAC, if suddenly all those people started using lossless instead Nanos would have to be in the tens of GB range and ipod in the 100's to sastisfy demand and besides, people are using video now, people WILL find an use for that much memory, it wasn't that many years ago when I bought a 40GB VAIO and I was told by a family friend that that was way too much for a student, but multimedia consumes a whole lot of memory, specially if you want the highiest possible quality.
People just have to be a little more discerning & start using Lossless, but I guess that that's an uphill battle I'm even having problem convincing my sister to get a regular iPod instead of a Nano, but she insists that Nano is more than enough. I guess i'll have to show her the difference using Lossless with a good pair of IEM's instead of AAC with the stock ipod earphones.
Anyway, still atleast with the ipod i don't have to carry an enormous CD case with just a small part of my music collection and have the annoyiance of having to switch from one disk to another, but still, it will be nice when I don't have to make any kind of choice of taking part of my collection and leave another, And I know I'm not alone.
BurtonCCC said:
Not really i mean 60Gb harddrive were out when the iPod came out..granted they were big ,to big for the iPod, but 600Gb flash drive is not in any product on the market today.
Also when the 5Gb iPod came out, there were 20GB music players on the market so a 60Gb model was not that crazy of an idea.
Checkmate? i think not
aricher said:
People will love an 600GB iPod, even those that think 60GB is excesive sthey omeday have got to realize that Lossless and IEM's are a good thing. They will love the "home-pod" (I know that I would, but Maybe call it something like iHub? jajaja). I Just know that a 500GB limit on an iMac just seems inadequate for the way a Computer can be used now and days (is that how is written "now and days"? sorry English is not my language, that's how I hear it but doesn't look right when written down).
There will be a demand for things like that, just not yet, I could wait 10 years, but PLEASE make it more like 5... People are getting kind of freaky for waiting even a few days for the so called MacBook, just Imagine the way I feel when told the 600Gb ipod should be coming in a good 20-50 years, the way I live I know I'll be dead before that.
What the hell you going to do with a 600gig ipod....damn i dont have that much music/documents/videos/movies.
New ipods coming with better games i guess....far cray, halo, god of war
Bless
New ipods coming with better games i guess....far cray, halo, god of war
Bless
I would imagine by the time they have a 600 gig iPod, they would have much better compression systems, where you could take a lossless down to a much smaller file, yet it would still also be considered "lossless". So you wouldn't even need a 600gig iPod.
wwooden said:
First, Chundels, thanks for the "nowadays" thing.
Well, there might be better compression systems in the future, but since they don't exist right now I don't know how big my music library would be in them, in that case my question would have been: when will it come out an iPod that carries about 1500-2000 albums in a lossless format?
Which meas we have to guess two things (compression capacity & iPod capacity) instead of one (iPod capacity), thats way more complicated and I'm a very lazy person but maybe that could give a more optimistic view of how long it would take for such an iPod (5 to 10 years instead of 10 to 20).
And besides, even if I don't fill a 600GB iPod just with music, somebody else will, and there's video and pictures to think about too, which means even if it's not just for music a 600GB might come in handy anyway.
P.S. People are quite active in here, posted just a couple of hours ago and already have comments, nice.
The other problem here is whether there is a big enough market for it.
There was a stat fairly recently that said that most people have less than 200 songs on their iPods. The 60GB models sell fewer than the 30GB by a wide margin - the mass market just doesn't have that much storage speed needed and that's what the iPod is aimed at.
Besides, who knows if we'll still have iPods at the point that that kind of mass storage is available? We might all have combo phone/video/music/browser devices to make it easier to justify the large sizes.
There was a stat fairly recently that said that most people have less than 200 songs on their iPods. The 60GB models sell fewer than the 30GB by a wide margin - the mass market just doesn't have that much storage speed needed and that's what the iPod is aimed at.
Besides, who knows if we'll still have iPods at the point that that kind of mass storage is available? We might all have combo phone/video/music/browser devices to make it easier to justify the large sizes.
If Moore's Law sort of performance is obtained for Flash products, and we take the 4GB Nano as the benchmark of what's feasible today, I'd say... 18 mos * 8 = 144 months = 12 years....
But more than that... I think you're not going to see anything more than a niche market cater to that. If you look at digital music players, understanding that there have been audiophiles clambering for increased bitrate for some time, the majority of the rest of us don't care, and the data backs that up. The iPod franchise has *never* gone after a bitrate increase in the five or six years it's been around, has it? And the store sells more and more digital music at 128 without a significant number of complaints regarding quality...
So I understand the audiophile's perspective. I really do. But I think that the determining factor in seeing 300GB iPods any sooner than that is going to have to be based on some other killer app that needs that space, and not lossless audio, because the market just doesn't support the latter application in volume. Even if you and thirty other MR users who are audiophiles and insist on lossless encoding reply to this post saying, "I would buy one in an instant," it's a big step from there to the millions of iPods Apple sells every quarter... the majority of which go to people who don't care.
So I guess if you want to see the size keep marching up quickly, we need to see adoption of those other technologies for the iPod. For instance, it doesn't hold *that* much video. Not nearly as many people can take the iPod music approach to video today, and take every video they've ever owned, and rip it into their iPod, and put all the DVDs and so on away. So right now, the success of video on iPods is *the* driving factor to see bigger iPods, I think.
But more than that... I think you're not going to see anything more than a niche market cater to that. If you look at digital music players, understanding that there have been audiophiles clambering for increased bitrate for some time, the majority of the rest of us don't care, and the data backs that up. The iPod franchise has *never* gone after a bitrate increase in the five or six years it's been around, has it? And the store sells more and more digital music at 128 without a significant number of complaints regarding quality...
So I understand the audiophile's perspective. I really do. But I think that the determining factor in seeing 300GB iPods any sooner than that is going to have to be based on some other killer app that needs that space, and not lossless audio, because the market just doesn't support the latter application in volume. Even if you and thirty other MR users who are audiophiles and insist on lossless encoding reply to this post saying, "I would buy one in an instant," it's a big step from there to the millions of iPods Apple sells every quarter... the majority of which go to people who don't care.
So I guess if you want to see the size keep marching up quickly, we need to see adoption of those other technologies for the iPod. For instance, it doesn't hold *that* much video. Not nearly as many people can take the iPod music approach to video today, and take every video they've ever owned, and rip it into their iPod, and put all the DVDs and so on away. So right now, the success of video on iPods is *the* driving factor to see bigger iPods, I think.
That is very interesting. 200 songs!Applespider said:
WOW! I didnt know the average was that small.
No wonder people laugh at me when I tell them I have 6000 songs on my ipod.
I personally think that an Ipod that big would have to have a different interface than the clickwheel. If you have 600GB just think how many laps your finger would have to do around the clickwheel to get from A to Z.
adk said:
If you move your finger fast, not many revolutions. The faster you move your finger the more it scrolls.
Anyway, I don't use loss-less for my audio (I probably will as soon as more iPod storage room is available.)
The main reason I want bigger iPods is because I am converting all DVDs I own to iPod video format. I have a 40gb 4th gen. I really want to get a video but I don't think I can until they're at-least 160gb.
I'm hoping by this time next year maybe.
mkrishnan said:If Moore's Law sort of performance is obtained for Flash products, and we take the 4GB Nano as the benchmark of what's feasible today, I'd say... 18 mos * 8 = 144 months = 12 years....
But more than that... I think you're not going to see anything more than a niche market cater to that. If you look at digital music players, understanding that there have been audiophiles clambering for increased bitrate for some time, the majority of the rest of us don't care, and the data backs that up. The iPod franchise has *never* gone after a bitrate increase in the five or six years it's been around, has it? And the store sells more and more digital music at 128 without a significant number of complaints regarding quality...
So I understand the audiophile's perspective. I really do. But I think that the determining factor in seeing 300GB iPods any sooner than that is going to have to be based on some other killer app that needs that space, and not lossless audio, because the market just doesn't support the latter application in volume. Even if you and thirty other MR users who are audiophiles and insist on lossless encoding reply to this post saying, "I would buy one in an instant," it's a big step from there to the millions of iPods Apple sells every quarter... the majority of which go to people who don't care.
So I guess if you want to see the size keep marching up quickly, we need to see adoption of those other technologies for the iPod. For instance, it doesn't hold *that* much video. Not nearly as many people can take the iPod music approach to video today, and take every video they've ever owned, and rip it into their iPod, and put all the DVDs and so on away. So right now, the success of video on iPods is *the* driving factor to see bigger iPods, I think.
I never bought anything at iTunes Store, and if Lossless doesn't become the industry standard someday I probably never will, that's what freaks me out when people start talking about how in the future such services could wipeout the actual act of buying a CD or DVD.
I think the iPod is going (or has gone) in 2 directions the ultra small music player, and the bigger media player, both are pretty big markets aren't they? I agree a 300GB iPod that plays exclusevely music would only find a niche market and hence is not realistic, but a multimedia player is not only realistic but actually reasonable. I grant that just a few of us would fill it with music and not much else.
People don't use lossless right now because that would mean leaving some of their prescious music behind. But what if in 5 years down the road you could have it both ways? Have the same capacity for the same price but using Lossless they would preffer that wouldn't they? Then as their music libraries got bigger and started looking for a bigger player, they would go with a different mindset of how much capacity they need, hence the over 100GB iPods.
At least that's what I hope happens in the next few years. It could also happen what some have said that music playerswill keep on reducing prices instead of incresing specs and they will become a cheap, almost disposable convenience just like CD players became. and we would have something like the $20 Nano and the $50 iPod or something like that. I hope it doesn't come to that but even if it happens, there will always be a High-End for any market and at some point I will be able to get what I want is just a matter of in how many years. I'm just hoping is sooner rather than latter.