iPod Evolution
How things change.
If you bought the first iPod back in 2001, you would have had the choice of the 5GB and 10 GB models (“1000 or 2000 songs”), with a 2“ black-and-white screen at 160 x 128 pixels, for $400 and $500, respectively.
Today, if you buy the 3rd-generation iPod Nano, you will have the choice of the 4GB and 8GB models (”1000 or 2000 songs“), with a 2” color screen at 320 x 240 pixels, for $150 and $200 respectively.
So we have essentially the same screen size and storage capacity, but today, six years later, you get twice the screen resolution, with color, movies, etc., at 40% of the cost.
Things have a tendency to change pretty quickly in technology. I remember, in the 90’s, getting a 105MB (that’s “MB”) hard drive for $300. I look at my AGFA digital camera from ten years ago and laugh; I look at the images it took and cry. Ten years ago, a 100 MB Zip disk cost $15, where a 1GB flash USB stick can be had for the same price today.
Yes, I know this is kind of a given, we all know about it… but still, it kind of surprises you to look back and see the differences.
Whoops. Getting an error for this page:
Warning: mktime() expects parameter 6 to be long, string given in /home/poza/public_html/wp/wp-content/plugins/shylock_adsense.php on line 364
Stumble it!
Filed under: Mac News,
Written by Luis at 12:05 pm | so far
The RSS feed is displaying ok but without the graphic.
David:
As to the error message: Apparently the Google Adsense plug-in which I recently pre-installed is interfering with the “On This Day” widget. Maybe it’ll work better when I have an AdSense account… otherwise one of the two will have to go. I shut down the AdSense plug-in, and the error has stopped.
As to the graphics problem: that’s likely because I finally got an htaccess script which prevents hotlinkers. Unfortunately, it means that only people viewing from within my site will see the images–and since RSS feed readers do so from without the site, you probably won’t see images from now on. No problem–just click through the link to my site.
I wish I could give you the images, and I know that some people will balk at clicking through, and that might ruin it for some people. Unfortunately, I have no choice. Hotlinkers, like the spammers, are destructive in their endeavors. It went over the top last month when a hotlinker used an image off my site that was 220KB, and it got viewed more than 17,000 times on her site. That got me into all kinds of trouble with my web host and nearly got my account shut down.
That’s the worst it has gotten, but frankly, I am sick and tired of people stealing my stuff and making me pay for it to boot. So the image block really has to stay in place.
My apologies for how this affects RSS readers. If you know a workaround, please let me know–I’d love to restore images for you–but I cannot afford to let hotlinkers go on and ruin my site.
Ciao Luis,
It is true that technology keeps on improving products, but there is one area that progresses very slowing. Battery duration. If we look at the batteries of any products the duration is still low. Instead of lasting 5-6 hours for portables PC’s and even 20+ hours for mp3 devices, I think after many many years the batteries should last 1 week or even 2 weeks. Why is it so difficulty to come up with a new technology in this area? Take care,
Frankie
Frankie:
That’s not entirely true. The technology has improved. Just not as quickly, and there are reasons why that’s true.
As an example, notice the specs of the original iPod and the new iPod Classic, both using the same HDD foundation. The original iPod could play back up to 10 hours of music. The new iPod can play up to 30 to 40 hours of music. That’s not exactly stranding still.
However, another part of the answer, I am sure, lies in the fact that we are constantly using more and more energy. Today’s devices call for more energy than did devices five or ten years ago. Today’s iPods have faster CPUs which use more electricity; they run color screens, not black-and-white, and play video, which also requires more energy. Doubtlessly the HDD’s also spin faster, and surely the machines use more energy in other ways.
I do not know how much more power today’s iPods suck up, but it can’t be a tiny difference from before. Look what happens when you go from audio-only to audio-and-video: the iPod Classic falls from 30-40 hours of playback to 5-7 hours. The iPhone will see similar problems when it goes from EDGE to 3G, which eats up lots more power.
Still, battery power has probably increased a total of fivefold at least over the past five years, probably more.
But why not faster? Well, we’re talking apples and oranges here. Data capacity and energy capacity are two completely different things. And don’t imagine that companies aren’t trying their damnedest to improve energy capacity in batteries. That’s probably part of the reason we’re seeing laptops burst into flames now and then–you may feel shorted when it comes to playback time, but that’s a hell of a lot of energy packed into those batteries you’re using.
Worth noting: This should probably be titled “iPod Evolution”, not iPhone evolution. After all, the only evolution happening in the iPhone world (thus far) is Jobs pissing off a ton of customers by clobbering them on price for the first few months the iPhone was on sale, then dropping it a lot and blowing them off when they complained.
It’s making me feel a lot better about waiting to buy an iPhone- the second generation should be even better (it’s a pretty neato product) and apparently if I can just hold out for a few months after it comes out, I’ll get a much better deal on it.
Yargh. I have been mixing up “iPod” and “iPhone” in my posts for the past two weeks. Caught all of them, I thought, and then made this whopping one. Now it is fixed. Thanks.