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.
New Digital Device in MWSF?
- Thread starter MacManiac1224
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
new device dreams...
Is it too early to expect something new to come out of the Emagic purchase?
An affordable Firewire DAW interface would be very welcome to the admittedly
"small" (relative to mp3 player, digital camera users) home recording market.
It would of course have to meet the apple adage of "being THAT MUCH better than everything currently on the market". Would an affordable firewire version of the US-428 or a consumer version of the logic control make a big splash bundled with Logic 5.5 or a slimmed down version therof? I don't know how feasible and profitable such a device would be because i really have no idea of the costs involved in making such a device. I'm just trying to think of other possibilities. A rack-mounted firewire device that records video and audio, that works with Logic, final cut, imovie, IDVD, etc.. Im just randomly naming wishes now but id rather hear others wild ideas than another person describe their ideal pda/phone.
Is it too early to expect something new to come out of the Emagic purchase?
An affordable Firewire DAW interface would be very welcome to the admittedly
"small" (relative to mp3 player, digital camera users) home recording market.
It would of course have to meet the apple adage of "being THAT MUCH better than everything currently on the market". Would an affordable firewire version of the US-428 or a consumer version of the logic control make a big splash bundled with Logic 5.5 or a slimmed down version therof? I don't know how feasible and profitable such a device would be because i really have no idea of the costs involved in making such a device. I'm just trying to think of other possibilities. A rack-mounted firewire device that records video and audio, that works with Logic, final cut, imovie, IDVD, etc.. Im just randomly naming wishes now but id rather hear others wild ideas than another person describe their ideal pda/phone.
Well, again, I don't think that Apple is going to enter a market in which they don't have an advantage. For instance, they brought hard drive technology to the portable mp3 market and leveraged their strengths in Firewire and iTunes to make the iPod a best-in-market product.
For those same reasons, Apple has no advantage in issuing a self-branded cellphone, pda or even digital camera. The technology behind these are already so well developed, a new entry company can hardly compete. Apple don't make cellular devices (they are instead king of Firewire and Airport, etc.). Apple don't make PDA's (they long ago relinquished that throne in order to focus on desktop machines like the iMac and PowerMac). Apple don't make optical lenses, flash memory or anything else related to photography.
(Side note: just about every magazine I've picked up in the last 4 months has had a 2 page ad showing an iMac and a Canon IXUS with the slogan, "If you get one of these [meaning, the digital camera], you're going to need one of these [the iMac with iPhoto on its screen]" - I'd say that's proof that Apple aren't planning on releasing a digital camera... why would they market a Canon one in the run up to its release?)
As for an audio interface, again, at the end of the day, an audio interface is an audio interface. What differentiates them is the quality of their components. With products like MOTU's 828 Firewire Interface (http://www.motu.com) and Metric Halo's MobileIO (http://www.mhlabs.com), there is no reason for Apple to enter this market. For those who the 828 or MobileIO don't serve, there are already USB audio interface solutions.
Although, out of the Emagic buy-out I *would* like to see iMusic or something to that effect, which would be a basic multi-track audio program. Perhaps this could be part of a new version of iMovie, which at the moment has just about NO audio controls. It would be nice if they improved this program somewhat to include basic for-home-movie audio editing.
I stick by my original post, however, saying that the new Apple Digital Lifestyle device will be a home-based unit, something like a dvd player with a hard drive inside. This unit will sit next to your television and communicate either by firewire, airport or a combination, to your desktop machine. It will act as a central mp3 server for your house (iTunes 4/Rendezvous) and also allow you to play back iMovies and iDVD's straight from your computer to your tv set (just transfer them onto the internal hard drive via the network, or burn a disc and carry it over). Perhaps with some integration of .Mac services (so that your tv set can display a .Mac Screensaver from a published photo album). Priced around the same as a regular DVD player, it will bring the benefits of internal storage and Apple integration to an already established device, much as the iPod did for the portable MP3 player market.
The reasons I think this will work are that: it would still require a Mac to function (and remember, Apple is in the business of selling hardware) in order to load your iDevice with media; it would boost demand for Airport (you need an airport if you want to keep it in your living room, separate from your desktop machine) and leverage on all of their core technology, strengths that they've invested so much in (Rendezvous, iTunes4, iMovie, iDVD), while offering the home entertainment market a one-of-a-kind product - there is nothing to compete with.
Having said that, this is all pure speculation. Read my previous post in this thread for the more inspired version!
I'm almost looking forward to MWSF more than Christmas morning now!
R*
For those same reasons, Apple has no advantage in issuing a self-branded cellphone, pda or even digital camera. The technology behind these are already so well developed, a new entry company can hardly compete. Apple don't make cellular devices (they are instead king of Firewire and Airport, etc.). Apple don't make PDA's (they long ago relinquished that throne in order to focus on desktop machines like the iMac and PowerMac). Apple don't make optical lenses, flash memory or anything else related to photography.
(Side note: just about every magazine I've picked up in the last 4 months has had a 2 page ad showing an iMac and a Canon IXUS with the slogan, "If you get one of these [meaning, the digital camera], you're going to need one of these [the iMac with iPhoto on its screen]" - I'd say that's proof that Apple aren't planning on releasing a digital camera... why would they market a Canon one in the run up to its release?)
As for an audio interface, again, at the end of the day, an audio interface is an audio interface. What differentiates them is the quality of their components. With products like MOTU's 828 Firewire Interface (http://www.motu.com) and Metric Halo's MobileIO (http://www.mhlabs.com), there is no reason for Apple to enter this market. For those who the 828 or MobileIO don't serve, there are already USB audio interface solutions.
Although, out of the Emagic buy-out I *would* like to see iMusic or something to that effect, which would be a basic multi-track audio program. Perhaps this could be part of a new version of iMovie, which at the moment has just about NO audio controls. It would be nice if they improved this program somewhat to include basic for-home-movie audio editing.
I stick by my original post, however, saying that the new Apple Digital Lifestyle device will be a home-based unit, something like a dvd player with a hard drive inside. This unit will sit next to your television and communicate either by firewire, airport or a combination, to your desktop machine. It will act as a central mp3 server for your house (iTunes 4/Rendezvous) and also allow you to play back iMovies and iDVD's straight from your computer to your tv set (just transfer them onto the internal hard drive via the network, or burn a disc and carry it over). Perhaps with some integration of .Mac services (so that your tv set can display a .Mac Screensaver from a published photo album). Priced around the same as a regular DVD player, it will bring the benefits of internal storage and Apple integration to an already established device, much as the iPod did for the portable MP3 player market.
The reasons I think this will work are that: it would still require a Mac to function (and remember, Apple is in the business of selling hardware) in order to load your iDevice with media; it would boost demand for Airport (you need an airport if you want to keep it in your living room, separate from your desktop machine) and leverage on all of their core technology, strengths that they've invested so much in (Rendezvous, iTunes4, iMovie, iDVD), while offering the home entertainment market a one-of-a-kind product - there is nothing to compete with.
Having said that, this is all pure speculation. Read my previous post in this thread for the more inspired version!
I'm almost looking forward to MWSF more than Christmas morning now!
R*
I t seems to me that sound recording has been neglected.
I speak as a teacher wanting to record children using an external microphone and then use the output in flash for the school website. I would wish for the ipod to be record enabled, I believe the encoder is already present in the ipod.
I don't want to buy Archos and so many of the other devices that will do the job are not Apple compatible.
It must have other uses in business etc so I can't understand why they don't do it???
I speak as a teacher wanting to record children using an external microphone and then use the output in flash for the school website. I would wish for the ipod to be record enabled, I believe the encoder is already present in the ipod.
I don't want to buy Archos and so many of the other devices that will do the job are not Apple compatible.
It must have other uses in business etc so I can't understand why they don't do it???
Just a brief look at the Apple Store seems to offer a couple of solutions for you:
Under HARDWARE : MUSIC&AUDIO there's a usb microphone, the LabTec Verse 704 for $30, or Griffin's USB iMic audio interface for $35...
I suppose these are the basic replacements for the current lack of audio-input ports (although I have to say, from experience, based on the quality of the old built-in ports, I'm glad to see them gone and replaced by decent - although external - solutions!).
As for audio software, some kind of audio iApp (what iMovie is to Final Cut Pro) would be welcome. A company called Bias already have out two products: Deck and Peak, which seem to do the job, although these are a few hundred dollars each...
Under HARDWARE : MUSIC&AUDIO there's a usb microphone, the LabTec Verse 704 for $30, or Griffin's USB iMic audio interface for $35...
I suppose these are the basic replacements for the current lack of audio-input ports (although I have to say, from experience, based on the quality of the old built-in ports, I'm glad to see them gone and replaced by decent - although external - solutions!).
As for audio software, some kind of audio iApp (what iMovie is to Final Cut Pro) would be welcome. A company called Bias already have out two products: Deck and Peak, which seem to do the job, although these are a few hundred dollars each...
I have to agree with you there. Plus, I think Apple's moto should be one of compatibility. I will get the same compatibility whether I buy a Nikon, Canon, or Olympis camera, they will all work equally with iPhoto, and whatever else. You don't need an Apple device to have good functionality. A lot of people already have digital cameras, PDA's, and cellphones, so they are most likely not going to go out and buy and Apple product, just because it is there.
The same goes for this Apple printer mumbo jumbo. There are markets for these devices already in place, and Apple needs to push compatibility with them. Apple is not going to enter any of these markets and just take off.
The iPod succeeded because they had an up and coming device, where they could add something that was worth it. The MP3 player market was in the infant stages, so Apple could safely enter that market.
I agree 100% with the home entertainment device idea, and I would rather see that than an Apple PDA or cellphone. Storing audio and video digitally is still in it's infancy, many people don't have Tivo's or those RioCentral devices. I would really like the ability to record FM radio and TV shows, without having to mess with VHS and cassette tapes.
I'm not predicting what will happen, I'm just going to wait and see. These are just my thoughts.
-Natron
Dear rdas7
I don't think you appreciate how dire the situation is in UK schools.
In my county we are not allowed to buy apple, they've been junked in their thousands.
And this still relates to the situation five years ago.
Personally I like using mine and I need the remote equipment that will allow me to do my job according to my imagination.
I have to use windows at school but I create the website at home on a Mac.
I need that sound enabled external device and I'm still waiting for an apple version.
If it doesn't come this January then sadly I will buy an Archos.
It's another nail. I see that Quark isn't too bothered about developing for the Mac Platform in this weeks MAcUser
I don't think you appreciate how dire the situation is in UK schools.
In my county we are not allowed to buy apple, they've been junked in their thousands.
And this still relates to the situation five years ago.
Personally I like using mine and I need the remote equipment that will allow me to do my job according to my imagination.
I have to use windows at school but I create the website at home on a Mac.
I need that sound enabled external device and I'm still waiting for an apple version.
If it doesn't come this January then sadly I will buy an Archos.
It's another nail. I see that Quark isn't too bothered about developing for the Mac Platform in this weeks MAcUser
audio i-App
I would love to see an audio iApp as well. There are plenty of other products in the field but Im very curious to see how Apple approaches the multitrack/workstation app angle. I use Cubase 5.1, Reason 2, Halion, Pro-52, Ableton Live, etc. but i would still love to see Apple/Emagic's take on consumer audio software. Peak and Deck (though i have used and continue to use both occasionally), frustrate me for very different reasons. Peak only allows two tracks although it can be quite versatile as far as that goes. Deck is too broad for my amateur tastes at times, with its focus spread to include video, etc. Often i still use 'good' ol' SoundEdit 16 for my basic track editing, importing samples, etc.. on my old DV+ 450 iMac (9.2). I keep envisioning a simple intuitive recording and multitracking app, with AudioUnit and Rewire capabilities with Apple's usual elegant design and a gorgeous OS X interface so i can really use my G4 iMac for audio as well. If they offered that for the usual iApp cost (free) i would gladly shell out thousands for a "dedicated" iApp/Logic control or whatever corresponding hardware or storage they or third parties could devise. USB audio (I currently use a Quattro) just has two many issues (small and large), and the lure of firewire is just too great to settle for iMics, US-428's, quattro's and the like.The new capabilities of Ableton Live look very interesting. The 828 is awesome but i can't help but feel, there is something much better coming in the near future. but then, i suppose there always is.
I would love to see an audio iApp as well. There are plenty of other products in the field but Im very curious to see how Apple approaches the multitrack/workstation app angle. I use Cubase 5.1, Reason 2, Halion, Pro-52, Ableton Live, etc. but i would still love to see Apple/Emagic's take on consumer audio software. Peak and Deck (though i have used and continue to use both occasionally), frustrate me for very different reasons. Peak only allows two tracks although it can be quite versatile as far as that goes. Deck is too broad for my amateur tastes at times, with its focus spread to include video, etc. Often i still use 'good' ol' SoundEdit 16 for my basic track editing, importing samples, etc.. on my old DV+ 450 iMac (9.2). I keep envisioning a simple intuitive recording and multitracking app, with AudioUnit and Rewire capabilities with Apple's usual elegant design and a gorgeous OS X interface so i can really use my G4 iMac for audio as well. If they offered that for the usual iApp cost (free) i would gladly shell out thousands for a "dedicated" iApp/Logic control or whatever corresponding hardware or storage they or third parties could devise. USB audio (I currently use a Quattro) just has two many issues (small and large), and the lure of firewire is just too great to settle for iMics, US-428's, quattro's and the like.The new capabilities of Ableton Live look very interesting. The 828 is awesome but i can't help but feel, there is something much better coming in the near future. but then, i suppose there always is.
I would like to see an audio iApp, as well as a professional level audio app. I use Peak regularly, but it's 2 track support is limiting, although it seems to work pretty well for what I do. I would like an easy way to edit audio using an audio app, and then take it into FCP or DVD Studio Pro. I do a lot of audio level control in Final Cut, but would really like a good app to mix multiple tracks in. Maybe the integration with DVD Studio Pro could be 5.1 and 6.1 surround sound support (maybe even 7.1).
-Natron
-Natron
Mike,
I think that for business or even school uses, on-location audio recording is best handled by other tools, such as portable tape or even DAT recorders and a microphone. These audio capture devices can then later be brought home (or wherever) to integrate with a Mac for further production or engineering.
In my experience, I actually use a minidisc player for location recording (which I do a lot of). The quality isn't as great as a DAT, but it serves my purposes and is a lot cheaper/smaller to carry around. I later import the audio via a MOTU 828 Firewire interface (although a Griffin iMic would do) into a professional audio app for compression, EQ, etc. (although again, a simpler program like SoundEffects, shareware for OS9, would also do.)
I understand your dilemma at school, but isn't an Archos Jukebox (colour screen, usb hard drive, mp3/mp4 playback, mp3 encoder, etc.) just a little bit of an overkill just for a portable audio recording solution?
After all, the recording feature of the Archos seems to be a direct-to-mp3 function which means if you want to later import to your Mac and integrate with Flash, etc. you'll lose some quality (assuming you want to change the bitrate for suitable web serving rather than just straight-importing the mp3 file). For instance, if you record at 160kbps on location, but want to post to your website as part of your Flash presentation in 16kbps or 24kbps, you would have to re-encode the audio file and do some manipulation.
For £340 (website price) for this Archos Jukebox, it seems like you'd be better of with a portable tape or DAT recorder or something similar. Surely the price of a DAT with an iMic (to import it into your Mac) is more cost-effective than a multimedia jukebox mp3 player with a colour screen?
Besides the apparent similarity of an Archos and an iPod, remember that you will not be able to benefit from any of the features such as iTunes synchronisation, playcounts, iCal or Address Book.
As for the nail-in-the-coffin comment about Apple, I don't really see how that is relevant as they are still chugging along quite nicely in light of the industry slump. I think it's a question of Quark not being able to keep up with Apple's innovation. After all, OSX is now at least 2 years old. What excuses does a software developer have to refuse to upgrade their software for 2 years? I'd sooner say the nail in the coffin of Quark than Apple.
I think that for business or even school uses, on-location audio recording is best handled by other tools, such as portable tape or even DAT recorders and a microphone. These audio capture devices can then later be brought home (or wherever) to integrate with a Mac for further production or engineering.
In my experience, I actually use a minidisc player for location recording (which I do a lot of). The quality isn't as great as a DAT, but it serves my purposes and is a lot cheaper/smaller to carry around. I later import the audio via a MOTU 828 Firewire interface (although a Griffin iMic would do) into a professional audio app for compression, EQ, etc. (although again, a simpler program like SoundEffects, shareware for OS9, would also do.)
I understand your dilemma at school, but isn't an Archos Jukebox (colour screen, usb hard drive, mp3/mp4 playback, mp3 encoder, etc.) just a little bit of an overkill just for a portable audio recording solution?
After all, the recording feature of the Archos seems to be a direct-to-mp3 function which means if you want to later import to your Mac and integrate with Flash, etc. you'll lose some quality (assuming you want to change the bitrate for suitable web serving rather than just straight-importing the mp3 file). For instance, if you record at 160kbps on location, but want to post to your website as part of your Flash presentation in 16kbps or 24kbps, you would have to re-encode the audio file and do some manipulation.
For £340 (website price) for this Archos Jukebox, it seems like you'd be better of with a portable tape or DAT recorder or something similar. Surely the price of a DAT with an iMic (to import it into your Mac) is more cost-effective than a multimedia jukebox mp3 player with a colour screen?
Besides the apparent similarity of an Archos and an iPod, remember that you will not be able to benefit from any of the features such as iTunes synchronisation, playcounts, iCal or Address Book.
As for the nail-in-the-coffin comment about Apple, I don't really see how that is relevant as they are still chugging along quite nicely in light of the industry slump. I think it's a question of Quark not being able to keep up with Apple's innovation. After all, OSX is now at least 2 years old. What excuses does a software developer have to refuse to upgrade their software for 2 years? I'd sooner say the nail in the coffin of Quark than Apple.
But there is a camera from kodak called the DCS 14n.
Anyway... you can't even buy a 1ds. how do you know how good it is???
I need a phone, I am waiting for another 6 months just to see if Apple jumps in.... if so, I know it would be one helluva phone, secondly, I see it using .Mac & hopefully, allowing my laptop to connect wirelessly (almost) anywhere, ok, that would pretty much rock
it'd be nice if it had a firewire port, or blutooth, or airport card in it to auto sync with the iPod or computer.
a firewire would be great, then just plug it in, and it charges the battery & syncs...
but white & chrome? yuck, how about something a proffesional would be proud of
it'd be nice if it had a firewire port, or blutooth, or airport card in it to auto sync with the iPod or computer.
a firewire would be great, then just plug it in, and it charges the battery & syncs...
but white & chrome? yuck, how about something a proffesional would be proud of
Best Mobile Phone for Mac Compatibility...
As far as I can see, the Sony-Ericsson T68i is the one and only way to go for now. I think I posted earlier on that Nokia were releasing a syncML-compliant 7250 but since then I've realised that it doesn't have bluetooth... or maybe I missed something?
As it stands, the T68i seems to be the best-in-market in terms of Mac compatibility, etc.
If you want to stick with Nokia, the 6310 or 7650 are the only other 2 options, however neither of them support syncML (and therefore AddressBook/Calendar synchronisation)
I would not bet on Apple releasing a phone.
As far as I can see, the Sony-Ericsson T68i is the one and only way to go for now. I think I posted earlier on that Nokia were releasing a syncML-compliant 7250 but since then I've realised that it doesn't have bluetooth... or maybe I missed something?
As it stands, the T68i seems to be the best-in-market in terms of Mac compatibility, etc.
If you want to stick with Nokia, the 6310 or 7650 are the only other 2 options, however neither of them support syncML (and therefore AddressBook/Calendar synchronisation)
I would not bet on Apple releasing a phone.
Re: Best Mobile Phone for Mac Compatibility...
The 6310(i) does support BT1.1 which is needed for the funky features of sending SMS etc. from AddressBook and it works very well (from my GF's handset).
i hope they do! (i'm sick of this 7650) but i also wouldn't stake the family silver on it.
Nokia 6310 (i or not) and presumably the 7650 as well (although I haven't tried it), will be recognised via bluetooth by your Mac. I use my 6310 as an external modem for my iBook when I'm on the go. Yes, I get caller ID via AddressBook and SMS sending (slow as a dog...) however, there is no way to sync data (addressbook or calendars).
I've heard that with the 6310i you can load a java applet that will talk syncML over bluetooth and thereby achieve these functions, but I've not seen or heard much about it.
Still hanging out for the home-appliance box we've been discussing.
Anybody else got some requested features for such a device? We got auto-scheduling/iCal integration for recording tv shows... anything else?
What would an Apple iPhone have in it? What would it look like (if not white/brushed metal?) What would an Apple PDA do? (No more specs please, let's talk functionality?)
Hey, only a couple more weeks to go until we find out!
I've heard that with the 6310i you can load a java applet that will talk syncML over bluetooth and thereby achieve these functions, but I've not seen or heard much about it.
Still hanging out for the home-appliance box we've been discussing.
Anybody else got some requested features for such a device? We got auto-scheduling/iCal integration for recording tv shows... anything else?
What would an Apple iPhone have in it? What would it look like (if not white/brushed metal?)
What would an Apple PDA do? (No more specs please, let's talk functionality?)Hey, only a couple more weeks to go until we find out!
yeah the 7650 can pair with the mac but it only has BT1.0 and hence no OBEX support.
i can send files to and from it via BT FileExchange utility but that's about as far as it goes
the 7650 is not a recommended purchase... am i drifting off topic?
Originally posted by lungaretta
yeah the 7650 can pair with the mac but it only has BT1.0 and hence no OBEX support.
i can send files to and from it via BT FileExchange utility but that's about as far as it goes
the 7650 is not a recommended purchase... am i drifting off topic?
Perhaps, but it's just the sort of thing I've been dying to know... the 7650 - come to think of it, ALL the Nokias - look great at first, then when you dig a little deeper the tech behind it seems to be a little lame (no bluetooth on models that support syncML, no syncML on models with bluetooth...) What is up with them?
All this so I can take 640x480 pictures. I'll go with a simple cell phone and a simple digital camera and save the cash.
Now about this new Digitial Lifestyle Device...
i cant see apple coming out with any sort of a phone (or a camera for that matter). I know good old steve likes his surprises but im sure we would know something about apple developing such specific hardware like this.
Personally i like the tv box idea, its an open market and thats waht apple kick ass at, not entering an already overcrowded phone market (not to mention having to develop them for different specs like 2g 2.5g and 3g or else limit the consumer base).
Personally i like the tv box idea, its an open market and thats waht apple kick ass at, not entering an already overcrowded phone market (not to mention having to develop them for different specs like 2g 2.5g and 3g or else limit the consumer base).
How much of a market is there for an home entertainment device like the one we're describing?? I, for one, really hope a device like this will happen, but I was just wondering what kind of market there is for it. Seems to me, it's pretty similar to the way the MP3 player market was when they introduced the iPod.
Apparently Sony is pushing the ability to view pictures on TV's, with the recent commercial with the guy calling his son to figure out how to view his pictures. He just plugs the memory stick into the TV.
I figure a device like we are describing would be better than that, since you can store all the pictures in one place.
-Natron
Apparently Sony is pushing the ability to view pictures on TV's, with the recent commercial with the guy calling his son to figure out how to view his pictures. He just plugs the memory stick into the TV.
I figure a device like we are describing would be better than that, since you can store all the pictures in one place.
-Natron