beats at dre Inside the iPod, Past and Present - S

Public Terminal
Forgot your password? Close binspamdupenotthebestofftopicslownewsdaystalestupi d freshfunnyinsightfulinterestingmaybe offtopicflamebaittrollredundantoverrated insightfulinterestinginformativefunnyunderrated descriptive typodupeerror !--> Stories Recent Popular Slashdot Ask Slashdot Book Reviews Games Idle YRO Apple Cloud Hardware Linux Management Mobile Science Security Storage 1455467 story Inside the iPod, Past and Present 409 Posted by michael on Friday January 21 2005, @08:14PM
from the outside-of-warranty dept. We mentioned the iPod Shuffle dissection a couple of days ago. Reader UtahSaint writes "Electronic Design have got a shipshape little article giving non-Apple workers
an insight into the makings of the original iPod and the revisions made (on a technical class) with the 2nd and 3rd generation iPods. The third-generation iPod contains two power-management chips from Royal Philips Electronics, a TEA1211 and a PCF50605. The TEA1211 is a dc-dc converter that can switch automatically between step-down and step-up operation in response to changing input voltage. The PCF50605, a single-chip power-management element (PMU), can adjust power-supply voltages to the lowest thresholds needed for functions in a particular power domain." And finally, sammykrupa writes "PC Mag has a great review of Apple's iPod Shuffle. It covers the quality of the audio output saying that it is has dead-flat frequency response, fewer harmonic distortion, and most notably, better bass response than its bigger siblings. The older iPods,beats from dre Dolby Digital Sound with Mp3 Headph, especially the Mini, have been rightfully criticized for being somewhat deficient in bass, and although the bigger players have flat frequency response, they have trouble sustaining big bass notes." Share this story
This story has 409 Comments
Read similar stories with these tags
//<![CDATA[ var hint = 'apple,slashdot,apple,applemedia,media,news'; var parent = ''; document.write(' This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted. Inside the iPod, Past and Present More Login Inside the iPod, Past and Present Comments Log In/Create an Account Search Discussion 50

Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to
use the classic dispute system instead. If you login, you can memorize this predilection. Full Abbreviated Hidden Score: 5 4 3 2 1 0 -1 More Login
If you look in the connector, there are five small lines between the main USB lines. (BTW, these are not contained in the Shuffle's dock.) There is also NO USB logo's in whichever of the packaging or documentation.
Still, overall we prefer a player with a navigation window. When we use irregular play on our personal digital audio player, we constantly find that it stimulates a dulcet mood; we'll then switch to a characteristic playlist or team of albums. Are we supposed to CARE how you use haphazard play? How you use irregular play is a personal decision, and should NOT factor into the review or the score you give the product. You might play it that way - others might not.
//<![CDATA[ var hint = 'apple,slashdot,apple,applemedia,media,news'; var parent = ''; document.write(' Slashdot Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments Join Log In Submit Story
Password:
Parent Re:quality of the audio output (Score:4, Informative) by BlitzPig_Sal (721288) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @09:01PM (#11437954) There tin most naturally be sound quality inconsistencies amongst various actors. The DAC (digital to analog converter) and the amplifier itself both endow greatly to how well the output sounds.

Most every portable player anymore uses an integrated piece to act the MP3 playback and amplification and many players from alter brands will use the same chips. The implementation of the circuitry whatsoever can still make a significant difference.

But for the really discerning audiophiles, the merely course to get decent sound from a portable player is to use an external headphone amp that utilises higher quality components and generally operates at higher supply voltages which assists provide more generous amplifier headroom. There really is a difference and you can hear it readily with better quality headphones. Parent two answers (Score:3, Funny) by commodoresloat (172735) writes: Where do you work that you need to use an iPod at work?Are they hiring? Re:Related story (Score:3, Interesting) by slAckEr Of dOOm (818662) writes: They obviously anticipate you to do some pretty strange material with it:
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
The reiterate should have been, not on the way they would rather to use the device, but how well the device works within the parameters it was designed for. That is, it was designed as a small-form random-play digital music player, and it does very well within those parameters.
Re:Does anyone really care what "we prefer"? (Score:3, Insightful) by i41Overlord (829913) writes: I think the problem is that other small, low cost players from other manufacturers do include a small screen.

So it woul dbe like comparing the Kia to another econobox that does have features that the Kia is missing. Apple has done it... (Score:3, Interesting) by Moustache N Tits (828608) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @09:30PM (#11438115) I really have got to say, I adore my iPod Shuffle. Although I played with the idea of selling it on eBay for a fast money, the $10 was worth it to me to have something this chic. I never expected it that small or light, and it's so uncomplicated. I never looked at the screen of my iTunes, and in my car I put it on shuffle and never manually change the anthem. It works well for me but what's unbelievable is how renowned the thing has been. Just like their big brothers they are getting scooped up left and right. You have to appreciate a enterprise that can take a 4 year old player, put it in a fine case and have it back ordered for 4 weeks. Now if they would just unlock a product to compete with Microsoft's Media Center. Low bass on intention (Score:3, Funny) by digitalgimpus (468277) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @10:33PM (#11438455) Homepage Could it be it was done because Apple engineers are sick of hearing someone with rediculus bass driving down the road when they are trying to nap?

Maybe they did it so they don't have to hear:

thud, thud thud..

every time somebody with an iPod comes walking.

If I were a automobile contractor... that would be my motivation for better soundproofing. To stop people from being so annoying.

(it's always sounds like the same damn song too doesn't it?) My mini sounds pretty great (Score:3, Interesting) by sjonke (457707) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @11:32PM (#11438696) Journal Since when is PCMag an audiophile magazine? I'm no audiophile either, but the final thing I would have thought about my mini is that it had poor bass response. If anything, when listening with my headphones (admittedly inexpensive, but well rated Koss phones) there might be a bit too much bass, but I reprehend that on the headphones, not the mini.

In any case, mostly I listen, not via headphones, but via line-out anchored up to the car stereo. My car stereo isn't great and the car listening surroundings is inherently sucky, but it doesn't suck with the iPod any more than with CD. And that's my glowing review of the iPod micro. Re:quality of the audio output (Score:3, Interesting) by FlipmodePlaya (719010) writes: I've been listening to iPod fanboys rant about their players' 'superijust aboutund quality' for years. I all replied that the player doesn't really influence the quality of the sound, it's all about the headphones/speakers and recording/compression. Was I wrong? If it's just playing a digital file (which will never wear like a record, and will always be read identically), could one player actually output noticeably different sound than dissimilar?

My guess is that even now it could, it wouldn't be by very much. Re:quality of the audio output (Score:5, Informative) by Hank Reardon (534417) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @09:00PM (#11437948) Homepage
Journal ...it's all about the headphones/speakers and recording/compression...

Re:huh? (Score:3, Informative) by Lisandro (799651) writes: Actually, there's a lot of earplug headphones that do a very fine work of reproducing bass. Of way, nowhere near a proper headphone set, but you can get a good bass kick from relatively inexpensive earplugs. I own a pair of el-cheapo TDK earplug spearkes that play metal, electronic and classical music just nice - all heavy-on-bass genres. I can't recall the model right now.

Fknow next to nothing ofme reason, a lot of portable devices have penniless low frequency response. Most of the time is to save a few bucks in parts - i've The real huh! (Score:3, Insightful) by Humorously_Inept (777630) writes: The terminology circling the sound quality is quite confusing. Namely, recommending that it is flat but has better bass response or that it is flat but has trouble "sustaining" huge bass memoranda virtually makes sense.

Flat is flat. Either the old players are not flat and deficient in the low frequency spectrum, or the new player is not flat and has some kind of thrust. The fact is that when most people hear flat they think, "Where's the bass?"

The article says nothing of the test data, equipment or theory Re:The real huh! (Score:3, Interesting) by afidel (530433) writes: You are correct, the origional iPod was flat or neutral in its frequency response. In fact it got rave reviews from audiophiles for accurate this feature. Unfortunatly most people are secondhand to ziped, bass pumped, overproduced pop and new rock which is made to sound "good" on car stereo's and other cheap systems. If you have good cans and appreciative good music you should love the origional iPod. Of course if you have high resistence headphones the iPod might not be the best pick since it's not terribly hi It kinda cements my desire to get an iPod Shuffle (Score:5, Interesting) by hattig (47930) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:35PM (#11437776) Journal I don't need a heavy capacity player, I just want to get my top 100/200 songs ever and carry them with me for those times I'm out.

Not only is it diminuitive, great merit (probably because of the absence of screen, but the 1GB Shuffle is 10 cheaper than a 512MB Sony, and 30 cheaper than a 1GB Creative in the UK). but it is actually pretty curse good.

Will this be the first Apple hardware I ever buy? Where will it end?! Cringely on Mac Mini, iPod, and Apple's maneuvers (Score:5, Informative) by Embedded Geek (532893) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:38PM (#11437790) Homepage Not instantly involving the iPod, but this week's I Cringely [pbs.org] has a discussion of how the new Mac Mini may be a push by Apple to get into the video distribution affair, trying to repeat with movie the success they've had with the iPod for audio. He has some interesting speculation on synergy from Pixar (which Jobs also controls) and Sony ("...you don't get the head of Sony at your event just to sell camcorders"). Well worth a read. Mini + iTunes = Apple's HD TiVo (Score:5, Interesting) by mveloso (325617) writes: on Saturday January 22 2005, @12:46AM (#11439040) One thing Cringely forgot is that people love to download quondam episodes of TV shows and see them again. I do that all the time with BitTorrent.

I'm sure there'd be a subset of people compliant to buy the current season of 24, Lost, Housewives, or American Idol and play it on their TV anytime - and blaze it to record.

HD Movies? Who cares. Today's TV shows? Sure! At a dollar an episode, why the heck not? It comes out to be cheaper than the DVD. Fans'll buy the DVD anyway, because of the extras.

Who knows whether this'll happen or not. But the carton is just sitting there, waiting to be plugged into your TV. Parent Hidden iPod Shuffle features? (Score:5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:38PM (#11437792)
Re:iVent (Score:3, Funny) by commodoresloat (172735) writes: Nah, don't return it. Instead, bitch about it on slashdot. I'm sure that ambition repair the problem. Re:WRONG (Score:5, Informative) by nuggetman (242645) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @09:26PM (#11438091) Homepage I thought it was:

1st gen: Buttons around wheel, mechanical wheel
2nd gen: Buttons around wheel, touch wheel
3rd gen: Separate touch buttons under screen, touch wheel
4th gen: Click cycle Parent Re:WRONG (Score:3, Informative) by waynelorentz (662271) writes: Nope, look at the various images at first : 4 clasps under shade and wheel below that, 2nd : 4 curved buttons around the wheel, 3rd : 4 buttons under screen and wheel below that, 4th : 4 spots on wheel that act like buttons.

I know it's heresy to say it in Slashdot, but Wikipedia is wrong (again). The picture is mislabeled. However, the text is correct when it says, "The 1G iPod featured 4 buttons - Menu, Play/Pause, Back, and Forward - sorted around the circumfer Re:Flat frequency response in consumer audio (Score:3, Informative) by ukleafer (845880) writes: I do not purchase that missing out on low and lofty end thing either

Look at the blueprint, it's all there - that's how our ears work. We aren't good at hearing lo and hello frequencies, so if we listen to material with a flat response, we perceive the 1kHz-4kHz range as being "louder".

because then we ought be working to live performances with EQ-adjustable ears, which we don't.

At live performances, we have engineers whose job it is to equalise the performance material both according to the properties of the v "Sync with iTunes" is all the functionality I need (Score:4, Interesting) by mrchaotica (681592) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @11:15PM (#11438644) See, that's the thing -- I want a Shuffle because for me, it really has more useful functionality than any other player. Here are my priorities in choosing a music player, in array of importance: Syncs with iTunes Cost Battery life Ogg (Vorbis and FLAC) patronize) Usability (cozy way to "shuffle play" function) Expandable arsenal (SD or CF) Does NOT patronize Windows Media Extra features like voice logging, radio, etc. Low size/weight As you can see, only iPods satisfy precedence 1, and the Shuffle satisfies priorities 2, 3, 5, 7 and 9 better than hardly ever anything another as well. The only other player that comes close to competing, for me, is the Frontier Labs NexIA -- it uses CF cards and has zero interior warehouse, so it satisfies priorities ~2, 3, ~5, 6, 7(?), 8, and ~9 (the ~ means that it's OK, but not as good as the Shuffle). It's not quite good ample, though, since it doesn't sync with iTunes.

Now, if the NexIA supported Ogg that would be enough to buffet the Shuffle, but I've emailed the company about it and the strongest respond I've administered to get is "maybe finally." Contrast this with the mighty potentiality that Tiger's iTunes will support it (which means the iPod should as well), and there's no longer any doubt -- the Shuffle is the remove victor.

It's kind of melancholy, really, because I'd like to have removable storage, but being able to use the thing is more important. Parent
I had a 3rd gen, now I have a 4th gen. Both drove my Grado SR-60 headphones (think Radar from Mash) just fine. In fact- they do a noticeably better job driving them at low frequency than my Powerbook.
It looks like Apple may have some secret features up their sleeves.
Let me be the first to mention... (Score:3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:16PM (#11437662) iPod Shuffe, no telegraph. Less space than a regular iPod. Lame. Re:Let me be the first to say... (Score:5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:20PM (#11437700) Troll? It's hilarious, it's a paraphrase of our illustrious Taco's first comment on the iPod... Parent Re:Let me be the first to mention... (Score:3, Interesting) by spac3manspiff (839454) writes: It is 200 greenbacks cheaper. Probably the cheapest, anyhow useful apple production. Re:Let me be the first to say... (Score:5, Informative) by Radius9 (588130) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @09:47PM (#11438194) By saying dead-flat frequency response, it means that the IPod is skillful to play all the audible frequencies at the same volume. Take for example, your typical after-market car stereo. It will tend to have way also much bass, which makes the music sound muddy. And that means it does not have a mucked frequency response. With a flat frequency response, if you want it to sound bass heavy, you can adapt the EQ (i.e. rotate up the bass), and make it sound that way. On someone bass heavy, you have to rotate it down just to make it sound natural. That's why it is desired, it means you can accurately play back the audio that was recorded. Parent Does it really matter? (Score:5, Insightful) by Simon (S2) (600188) writes: on Friday January 21 2005,beats at dr dre Beats headphones accessories apportion Article Web Palace, @08:17PM (#11437666) Homepage The older iPods, especially the Mini, have been rightfully criticized for being somewhat deficient in bass, and although the bigger players have flat frequency response, they have trouble sustaining big bass notes.

The iPod is designed to take with you and hear music on the bus, or while jogging - with headphones. Does it really matter how nice the bass is if you listen to it with headphones anyhow? I think not. Re:Does it really matter? (Score:5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:22PM (#11437712) You can obtain quite nice bass reproduction in high-end headphones for MUCH cheaper than you can in high-end stereos. Unless you're a rap flare, where it seems the point of bass is to shake your rib-cage, high-end headphones can clone a broad spectrum of frequencies quite well. Parent Re:Does it really matter? (Score:5, Informative) by Lisandro (799651) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:23PM (#11437717) Actually, bass performance is one of the principal asset i look in in portable devices when it comes to audio quality. In most melody genres, if the bass "ooomph!" is lost the sound becomes lackluster, not to advert that good bass isolates you from outdoor sounds (for me, at fewest).

My Sony Minidisc does bass wonderfully, and even compensates a morsel for it's restricted most volume. Parent Re:Does it really matter? (Score:5, Interesting) by Lisandro (799651) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:47PM (#11437855) Well, that's you. 99% of the i don't want EQ on my music, of any kind, not even a bass cut from a poor output DAC. Classical, metal, rock, and electronic music are all massive on bass, and it's stuff i listen to most of the time. I don't want poor bass reproduction just like i don't want poor highs or mids.

By the way, if proper bass reproduction (not boombox-thumping bass like) makes you laborious to listen to the rest, your audio gear is poor. And not in the "it's not audiophile! get $1000 wires!" sense of poor. Parent Re:Does it really matter? (Score:5, Funny) by Ohreally_factor (593551) writes: on Saturday January 22 2005, @12:25AM (#11438924) Journal if you are listening to classic music on a system that includes a subwoofer, you bought the bad system

######## you, you ########ing tuba hater. I hope you get run over by someone carrying a Sousaphone.

=) Parent Re:Does it really matter? (Score:5, Insightful) by radish (98371) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:34PM (#11437773) Homepage Good head/ear phones can do bass very well. SO if the player can't, then yes, it's a problem. Parent Re:Does it really matter? (Score:5, Funny) by wfberg (24378) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:48PM (#11437864) Good head/ear phones can do bass very well. SO if the player can't, then yes, it's a problem.

Trouble is, the metro you're riding does an even better job at producing bass. Parent Re:Does it actually stuff? (Score:3, Informative) from now on (598383) writes: It's what you want whether you're into accurate forgery of sound. If the answer (to input) curve is flat, it manner that the output of the system is an exact forgery of the input. The curve is along a diagram with decibels on the y-axis and frequency along the x-axis. In schoolrooms of the future... (Score:4, Funny) by OneOfAKind (842855) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:17PM (#11437668) "Eek! How gross! I'm not disecting that iPod!" Makings of the original iPod? (Score:5, Interesting) by Gob Blesh It (847837) writes: <gobblesh1t@gmail.com> on Friday January 21 2005, @08:20PM (#11437699) The linked article is amusing from a technical standpoint, merely it's likewise pretty dry--after the lead paragraph, the lyricist doesn't really talk approximately the sweat and tears behind the scenes. Fortunately, the Times Magazine ran a story [nytimes.com] (reg-free interlock) a couple years antecedent almost the people side of iPod, from concept to birth. Turns out the iPod didn't spring entire from the tip of Steve Jobs' magical wang. The article's worth a peruse whether you're into this kind of thing. Re:Makings of the original iPod? (Score:4, Insightful) by NutscrapeSucks (446616) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @09:26PM (#11438095) Apple distinctly turned the market for the Toshiba disks for a while. But now there is, inevitably, an alternative. Hitachi now makes a disk that size

Buried in the article, there was this opener fact. Owning all the teeny hard drives aboard the market because extra than a year translated into a long-term knowledge vantage for Apple -- that iPod == Smallest == ######iest immediately and always.

Had they not had the foresight to monopolize the formfactor, the iPod would have been one of a half-dozen similar models on the market consist in ... it was electing up and it might have been lost in the pack (especially because the early models were firewire only). Parent Sound Quality (Score:5, Interesting) by exquisito (789236) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:24PM (#11437723) The point is that the old Ipod headphone preamps didnt't have enough juice to power most headphones properly. What is the hardest frequency to reproduce? The bass. So, even with headphones and the eq turned up, the bass didn't sound as full and punchy as it should have. This was probably the worst defect sound quality advisable. The AAC or MP3 encoding at 128K are virtually indistinguishable from CDs for most listeners, but most listeners can hear the lack of bass. Its like something is missing. Hard on the batteries (Score:4, Informative) by eclectro (227083) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:27PM (#11437734) is a dc-dc converter that can switch automatically between step-down and step-up operation in response to changing input voltage.

Without examining the perimeter myself,beats by dre, I could dream that while the batteries fall below Vcc that the converter switches from step down apt step-up to invest increased activity period, until the batteries are completely drained.

Maybe someone can confirm/deny this.
Re:Hard on the batteries (Score:5, Informative) by Lisandro (799651) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:33PM (#11437769) That's it. In this way you use every bit of charge there's avaiable on your batteries. Which once they fall below the minimum voltage threshold might not be many, but still, it all counts. Parent huh? (Score:5, Insightful) by SuperBanana (662181) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:33PM (#11437772) The older iPods, primarily the Mini, have been rightfully denounced for being somewhat deficient in bass, and though the bigger players have flat frequency response, they have trouble sustaining big bass notes."
From the review of the shuffle:
This would be like reviewing a Kia and mentioning "We tend to drive elegance vehicles like a BMW, and hoped that this car was a luxury car instead of an econobox," and scoring it down simply because it wasn't a BMW.
Get More Comments Where the system is concerned, you're not allowed to inquire "Why?". FAQ Hall of Fame Advertising Terms Privacy About Trademarks attribute of their respective owners. Comments owned by the poster. 2011 All Rights Reserved. Geeknet, Inc. Slashdot
Close Working...
Any problems with low frequency response probably have something to do with the fact that, despite the Steve Reality Distortion Field, you cannot get good low-frequency response in a tiny little earplug. You can put marketspeak on your website till the cows come home about Neodymium magnets make 'em better- they're still just tiny earplug speakers.

Nickname:
The crappiest set of speakers and headphones will sound much better through a decent preamp and amplifier than the most valuable speakers and headphones will sound through a $19.99, underpowered clearance special.

The Fine Print: The emulating comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
If, in fact, all media players have identical, real-world response, then you'd be correct. This is seldom the circumstance, although. A lot of manufacturers skimp on the preamp and amplifier stages in audio equipment to save a few bucks because, after all, digital is digital.
With all of the iPod Shuffle discussion and disections, I am wondered to see that no one has commented on the surplus lines in the USB connector.
It's not true, u dont need a test, its just not... (Score:3, Interesting) at NeedleSurfer (768029) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:52PM (#11437893) Dead flat!? I dont trust it, the Telefunken at SNB (a mastering laboratory in montreal) namely the flatest chip of equipment you might come accross and this baby isn't faultless flat, it spend 85000$ originally and required over 50000$ revision to fulfill such audio rendition.

Dead-flat? I really doubt it, then another PC mag made the call, not Audio-Media, Post or Mix...

Computer mags and websites should sincerly refrain from judging audio... because when they do, a million techno morons go down the street speading bullshit like they know what they talk about, they just reiterate lies and since no one even them knows what they are talking about and those geeks have techno honors in other peoples mind, other people begin spreading the same bullshit but with the tel game kicking in (story gets modified each time it is told...), sentences changed to "my friend who studied programming told me that the audio performance of...". Re:It's not true, u dont need a test, its just not (Score:5, Informative) by Chris Johnson (580) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @09:53PM (#11438218) Homepage I'm a mastering engineer and hang out on mastering web boards, and the iPod came up in conversation.
FWIW, a tech heavyweight (attempting to remember if it was Bruno Putzeys?) said they'd fathomed the iPod and got a perfect 10K tone out of the bugger with virtually unmeasurable sidebands.
NOT easy. That outperforms a heck of a lot of high-quality CD players, not idea mp3 portables. iPods apparently have very good tech if you understand how to measure them. Jitter is what that 10K tone test measures, and it performed very, very well, I'm told.
Parent What does this mean? (Score:3, Insightful) by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) (613870) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:52PM (#11437894) Journal although the bigger players have flat frequency response, they have trouble sustaining big bass notes If the response is flat then by definition it can play back bass notes. This reads more like audiophile verbal diarrhea than something with semantic value. Does anyone really care what "we prefer"? (Score:5, Funny) by LoadStar (532607) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @09:04PM (#11437967)
It's now off the site, but still exists in Google cache: www.apple.com/ipodshuffle/+ipod+shuffle&hl=en
I've compared an .aiff document played back through my computer's rackmounted audio interface (made by MOTU, for those who attention,Features of Noise Cancelling Headphones - Article Knowledgebase - Internet Marketing Article Advertising, and also connected to the Soundcraft desk) and the same track played back from the iPod. I don't hear a significant difference in bass response. The human who complain about bass must be using 'phones with impedance that doesn't admit with the iPod's headphone jack.
Password:
Hacking the iPod Shuffle. (Score:3, Funny) by PopeAlien (164869) writes: Possible secret features:

weld resistor between lines 2 & 3 - Shuffle grows full color OLED touch-screen!

open Shuffle and cover circuit embark with emulsion cheese, insert in USB slot - $500 dollar springs from CD drive!

mallet bent paperclip in headphone jack - Steve Jobs comes to your home and cleans your car!

..now thats insanely excellent!
Re:Hidden iPod Shuffle features? (Score:5, Informative) by jschrier (852198) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @09:45PM (#11438189) Homepage Probably no mysterious features.

Standard USB specifies the existence of hosts (with Type-A connectors) (such for desktop computers) and peripherals (with Type-B connectors) (such as hard drives, cell calls, digital cameras, etc.) Hosts are not supposed to connect to each other, and neither are peripherals.

The USB-To-Go specification was built in order to allow pseudo-peripheral devices to connect to each other (e.g., you might connect your cell phone to camera so that the phone can bring the file, even though both of these are peripherals to your Mac). By connecting the fifth pin of the type-B connector to floor, Vcc, or letting it float, you denote to the other (type-B) device if you want to act as the host, act as the peripheral, or if you just behave like a standard USB device.

Coincidentally, most of the mini-B connectors sold these days are 5-pin, because legacy devices can just depart the fifth pin drifting. From the manufacturer's point of outlook, there is no cause to have two types of interchangable items in stock. So my surmise is that AAPL bought what was for bargain on the market.

--js

Parent I don't care what anybody says (Score:5, Funny) by banky (9941) writes: <(gregg) (at) (neurobashing.com)> on Friday January 21 2005, @08:40PM (#11437802) Homepage
Journal "Loud enough to cause hearing damange" is a *feature*. on simplicity (Score:5, Insightful) by weiyuent (257436) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:41PM (#11437813) Journal "La to the nines est atteinte non quand il ne reste rien à ajouter, mais quand il ne reste rien à enlever." (Perfection is achieved, not when you have nothing more to multiplication, but when you have nothing more to take away).

-- Antoine St. Exupery (1900-1994)
Re:on simplicity (Score:4, Funny) by LakeSolon (699033) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @11:22PM (#11438666) Homepage What the perdition... Did you just attribute to GWB a quote by Albert Einstein [wikiquote.org]?

~Lake Parent You listen what you want to hear (Score:5, Insightful) by youbiquitous (150681) writes: on Friday January 21 2005, @08:48PM (#11437867) I mostly use my 4G iPod interlocked to a Soundcraft mixing desk, which is chained to a set of Tannoy midfield studio monitors, every of which is powered by a separate beefy power amplifier fleeing in bridged mono mode.

You forgot one crucial piece in the first part of that: the amplifier stages.
Nickname:
Public Terminal
Forgot your password? Close Close

In the small publish at the bottom of Apple's iPod shuffle page:
#2. Do not eat iPod shuffle.