iPod Photo
Well, finally all the rumors of an iPod with a color screen for viewing photos have actually amounted to something. Today, Apple announced a new iPod called iPod Photo. It’s a bit more expensive than the standard iPod at $500 for a 40GB model ($100 more than the standard 40GB model), and $600 for a 60GB version.
The most detailed page about the iPod Photo that I've found so far indicates that it will display Tiff, PNG, JPEG, GIF, and BMP, but no RAW. You will be able to output images to a TV via S-Video or Composite connections, and there is an improved 15-hour battery life, the color screen, of course. In addition to being able to synch your images with a new version of iTunes released today, it will also let you sync album art for your music (and maybe audio book?) titles. The screen will be 220 by 176 pixels at 65,000 colors. This is not terrible, but still pretty small compared to other photo viewers, or even some mobile phones like the upcoming Treo 650.
I actually upgraded to a 40GB 4G iPod just a couple of months ago, so it’s a little annoying that if I had just waited a little bit longer, I could have saved up an additional $100 and gotten the added capability over what I have. So pardon me if what follows sounds a bit grumpy.
While progress is always good, I can’t help but think that Apple has really been taking advantage of the fact that they control a huge chunk of the market to make this progress really slow. We’ve had for quite some time now other products that have given larger screens with higher resolution, plus the ability to watch video in addition to just viewing individual pictures. The iPod Photo will not allow for direct loading via memory cards, rather one will have to use an accessory like the Belkin Media Reader at added expense and with a fairly slow transfer rate. Neither will you be able to play RAW digital photo files. Although the last two features might only appeal to digital photography enthusiasts, the fact that no video file format is going to be supported, not even Apple's own Quicktime, is I think a universally understood disadvantage. Why did it take about four years for Apple to get a color screen to view images? Maybe by 2008 they will have an iPod Video! I don’t want to sound like a naysayer, but I am just dying for some major company like Sony, or even a well-known name like Epson to provide us with a device that not only does a whole lot more, but is actually designed as nicely as the iPod is. This might just provide some decent competition for the iPod which it currently does not have. And that’s why Apple can take it’s own sweet time introducing features that have been on other devices for years!
Thanks Gizmodo, for the heads up!