MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Enquirer writers are a bunch of morons that don't know what there writing about. Just like the newspaper magazine. A bunch of made up stories about stupid rediculous things that make no sense. Anyone could do there job.

Anyone who knows Hi-Fi won't buy this Apple Boombox thingy. Non Hi-Fi types buy B&O;for the sound quality. Hi-Fi types know B&O;mostly produce nice looking junkfi or lofi. Go to a Hi-Fi trade show and listen to systems that cost
$100,000+ those WILL be Hi-Fi! Sadly, most people these days don't know about Stereo or imaging or even the benefits of valves over transistors. Steve Jobs does know about Hi-Fi. I heard the speakers he is supposed to own at a show and they are good. Saying he's going to give up his $50,000+ setup in favour of this Boombox is just marketing and every Hi-Fi enthusiast knows it.

Macaday, it was the Inquirer, not the Register. Make sure your anger is directed at the right site!

As for the iPod Hi-Fi being/not being competitive with a 5.1 surround stereo. That's like saying a Subaru outback isn't competitive with a Porsche 911. They are targetted at completely different markets people!

A 5.1 surround stereo is designed to be installed in your home theatre. You have to run speaker wire all over the place (in the walls preferably), and for the average person, a 5.1 surround system is a nightmare to setup and use. Once you install it (after 1-2 hours), you pretty much leave it there and never move it again unless you have to. iPod integration costs extra.

The iPod Hi-Fi, is designed to put on your kitchen counter, or your deck, or your nightstand. It takes all of 2 minutes to set up. It has iPod integration built-in and a remote control. You can easily take it to the garage when you're working on your car or to the cottage or a picnic.

So where's the problem people? If you want a home theatre setup, get a 5.1 surround amp and speakers. If you want something simple, that takes far less space, is easier to use and portable, then consider an iPod Hi-Fi, or similar product.

fscking idiots

informed: I agree with you, there's better sounding options for the same price than one-piece iPod speaker systems. I have a old Aiwa bookshelf stereo with a line-in cable for airtunes/ipod that sounds great. All I'm saying is lets actually test and compare things in the same category (semi-portable, one-piece, ipod specific, $300 range).

rolleyes: There are too many experts (i.e. professional ass talkers) whose opinions are less useful than opinions posted in places like these. And less fun to read.

"iPulse. Available in vomit colors." See, the Hi-Fi isn't so ugly, is it?

Apple marketing department has excelled again:

"Change the way you experience digital music. For $349, iPod Hi-Fi delivers crystal-clear, audiophile-quality sound in a clean, compact design. Hear, hear."


Audiophile-quality sound - from an MP3 file with 53-16kHz reproduction? That's FM radio quality! Who on earth would describe FM radio as "audiofile quality". It's a blatant lie.

Really.

Because many Mac apologists were less than wildly impressed with the appearance of Apple’s iPod Hi-Fi and the video specifications of the new Mac mini, Thomas et al are making outrageous comments and predictions. However, this recent blip in history hardly characterizes Apple’s capacity for providing functional and innovative products. Apple’s demonstrable economic dominance in downloadable music and vastly superior OS are probably better measures of Apple’s future success.

Now, consider the absence of the “iPod killer” and the agonizingly and embarrassingly long wait for Microsoft’s emasculated, yet bloated and apparently butchered, version of Longhorn. When PC apologists have no viable commercial product to compare and contrast with Apple’s their only recourse is to resort to subjective opinion and emotional-based insults.

It is easy to see that the emotional strain exhibited by PC apologists is beginning to take its toll in objective thinking. As long as mere opinion and snide remarks are all Andrew Thomas and his peers have to offer it proves that their arguments are unfounded and their assessments are worthless.

It's like a woman sports writer writing about how jock straps are overrated. Or a male journalist saying tampons are more effective than pads. This guy is just starving for hits. Any douchebag can do it. Don't fall for it.

Ah, MacDude, our resident troll said:

The iPod HiFi IS a piece of over priced ugly garbage we almost all can agree on that.

Um, no, we cannot.

Ugly? I for one appreciate its understated design. Haven't heard it yet, but I expect it just might make a great addition to my den. I was thinking of Tivoli or Henry Koss or Bose, but I like the simplicity of this unit better. Once I get a chance to hear it, I'll make up my mind.

Garbage? Sheesh, how do trolls like you get from "could be better" [I agree with that] to "garbage"? Where did reason and perspective and proportion go in this world? Or are you still in pre-school?

Over-priced? Only if it is more than you want to pay, or you can point to a competitive product that produces same value and quality for a substantially lower price.

Precisely because your post is about "taste," by definition, we cannot agree on it.

MW: "small," as in MacDude's small brain.

is it just me or has there been an increase of "Apple/Mac OS/iPod/iTunes is stupid" articles lately? it's to the point of being passe of blase, take your pick. face it...
these pathetic people are simply trolling for hits!! they're trying to anything to justify receiving a paycheck.
please, people, please....

DONT FEED THE TROLLS. if you ignore them they'll fade away into 'net oblivion.

informed -

"Read Apple's published specs: 'Frequency response: 53Hz to 16kHz ± 3 dB'

That isn't even remotely high fidelity. By DEFINITION!!!!!!"

Ever heard of Spica TC-50 loudspeakers? That's about their frequency response. They sold for $550/pr. And, they made Stereophile's list of the top 100 audiophile products of all time. If you think frequency response and size determine sound quality, you're not "informed".

That said, I doubt Apple's boombox is anywhere near being true hi-fi, or even mid-fi. You'd probably get much better sound from a cheapo receiver and a pair of PSB Alphas. But, nobody takes the car makers seriously when they say their SUVs are actually sports cars. So, why are people taking Apple's marketing hyperbole at face value? Nobody really believes the iPod Hi-Fi is a replacement for a true hi-fi rig costing several times as much. The real question is, does it sound good for this class of products, and my guess is that it probably does. My biggest gripe is with the fact that you can't separate the speakers. But, with a product like this, nobody's expecting to enjoy real 3D stereo imaging. Most people don't even know what that is.

So, the hyperbole is ridiculous, but if it's a decent product in a category where a lot of products sound just plain lousy, Apple will have done well. Apple's not about hi-fi. It's about convenient access to your music.

This guy is so smart he should run for government office.

Macromancer:

It wasn't my intention to pick a fight. I was excited when the rumors went round that Apple was going to release a powered-speaker-dock thingy.

I figured Apple would do it right. I figured they would deliver a good value for the money. Apple's computers could always justify their prices. This HiFi can't.

If Apple had priced this thing at $199, I might even buy one.

It's the $350 price tag that pisses me off. I find it absurd. I find the the $299 price of the Bose dock to be absurd. This is from someone who has an expensive Yamaha/Tannoy surround system in my living room, an expensive Pioneer/Infinity stereo in my bedroom, and a professional recording studio.

$350 should be able to buy a lot of high fidelity. I hope Apple wakes up from their dream soon. This product isn't home stereo reinvented. This is Cadillac pricing structure applied to cheap plastic.

Perfect article to alleviate temporary constipation

I guess this guy forgot that Windows is still based off of MS-DOS. Isn't that a few decades old, also?

This guy is so smart he should run for government office.

BWAAAA...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

now THAT'S comedy!!

If the guys from the Inquirer say we're gullible saps.
Well...they are the experts.

Majikthize:

Are your thighs really magic? (I haven't the slightest idea how to pronounce your nick)

No, I have never heard of Spica TC-50 loudspeakers. Surely you realize that Top 100 lists in magazines are toilet paper for landfill rodents. Those lists are only published get people all fired up to write in and agree/disagree with the magazine--just like these blogs.

We are all so clever.

I can't believe people here are playing into this guy's trolling trap. Wait . . . this is MDN, I guess I can believe it.

On a side note, If the ipod hifi is successful, I think it is "home stereo reinvented". No cd player, no wires, just ipod and speaker.

"If the ipod hifi is successful, I think it is "home stereo reinvented". No cd player, no wires, just ipod and speaker."

Except that it's been done before. I wouldn't exactly call having built-in handles "revinventing home stereo."

an ancient OS called UNIX

Whoops! Retard alarm just went off! Time to stop reading.

successful

YHBT

A masterflamebaiter is trolling for hits. The Enquirer in the U.S. has more dignity and credibility.

Here's a summary:
1. My editor says I need more hits.
2. Apple fans are easy to rile.
3. Apple sucks.
4. I have no first hand knowledge of any new or old Apple products but that's not a requirement for my job.
5. Macs are toys. They must be because I wouldn't make a mistake in computer choice.
6. iPod and iTunes are a fad.
7. I know all of the buttons to push make millions of Mac users angry. It's the main reason I have a job here.
8. Apple and Steve Jobs suck.
9. Fashion is an easy mark.
10. All Apple customers are fanatics and brainwashed cultists. Every one.
11. Profit.

Informed is quite right, of course. 16kHz? Sheesh! Most humans can hear at least up to 20kHz. At 16kHz you can't hear what's no longer there 'cos it's been filtered out. To say otherwise is to argue that black is white. It's science, folks!

A quick Google search turned this up:

Public Switched Telephone Network: 300Hz to 3kHz
AM Radio: 100Hz to 5kHz
FM Radio: 50Hz to 15kHz
Consumer stereo system: 20Hz to 20kHz
Professional audio equipment: 5Hz to 24kHz

- just some guy's opinion, of course, but near enough. As I said yesterday, the iPod is specced at 20Hz-20kHz. The iPod Hi-Fi isn't.

But then, what do I know? I haven't actually heard one yet.
/sarcasm

Re the HI-FI debate!
Glad we are reaching some peace on this...
Surely the concept of a "hii-fi" system for the ipod (read MP3 quality) is a contradiction in terms, is the sound quality in the compression too bad for any true hi-fi ear (I am not one of thoose). My impression was that even cd compression was almost unaccepteble for true hi-fi buffs!?
So I think that as macromancer was arguing that the point of the ipod hi-fi is more to giive a good sounding/compact & stylish boom box for your ipod!?
Whether they have achived this time will tell!



PS did anyone see that german tube-amp thing made to go with to pod think it was priced at around 5000, to play mp3's from what planet???

Reality Check:
>What kind of idiot reads The Inquirer ? What's the draw, because it is not informative journalism.

Same kind of idiot as reads MDN.

Oh man, talk about an easy straight line...

Wouldn't it have more effect if people wrote to the editor of The Inquirer rather than to the author when pointing out the flaws in this article? Obviously email to the author isn't going to do a thing except allow you to vent, but a ton of email to the editor telling him that, because of Thomas, you no longer trust what the Inquirer says. (that's assuming you did in the first place)

I think the Hi-Fi is a total joke. It's an accessory, not even a stand-alone product by itself. And as an accessory, it's overpriced.

On the other hand, I'm really interested in the new Mac Minis. However, I guess I'll wait for the new models that don't have Intel Craphics built-in.

TT: "Apple makes more money from their PCs than they do their ENTIRE ipod line combined. Not to mention software sales."

Up until last quarter, you were right. However, last quarter, Apple's revenue of iPods and "other related music products and services" was $3.4 billion. PCs, peripherals, and software came to $2.35 billion.

So Apple is now making more money selling iPods than PCs.

"Still not exactly built to replace your main home stereo but it'd be great for an office."

OR A DORM ROOM.

I'm calling Bu!!sh!t on all the joe audio pro's who are spouting off. One person claimed that it can't be High Fidelity BY DEFNINITION! What definition are you using? Looking up High Fidelity in wikipedia leads me to believe that the freq response range would qualify. In fact, aside from the fact that most people can't even hear outside of the range specified, there is the quote "The term high fidelity tends to be applied to any reasonable-quality home-music system".

It's a worn out marketing term. Like "space age" or "hi-tech". I'm not saying it's a good or bad product. I'm pretty sure not one of us here has even heard it and from the blabbering I've seen on this board I can tell that the audio pros on here are pretty much spouting crap.

It's given up its own operating system and bolted a pretty GUI on an ancient OS called UNIX.

Don't let the fool fool you; Windows XP and it's predecessors can trace their own heritage back to the '70s from the VMS lineage thanks to Dave Cutler and his former employers DEC. Microsoft even got sued for stealing VMS code from DEC.

http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/Index.cfm?IssueID=97&ArticleID=4494

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Microsoft_Windows#Windows_3.1_and_NT

Well, the guy may be blowing smoke out his ass, but I MUST agree with ONE of his statements:

"Apple now launches an overpriced product so demonstrably inferior to a genuine HiFi system..."

Seriously, the iPod Hi-Fi is NOT hi-fi no matter HOW much RDF and spin is used to sell it. It's a desktop iPod speaker system. PERIOD.

I'm feeling quite gormfull today and hapfull and feckfull as well.

I wonder what the billionaire Steve Jobs had as a sound system before? It's either great or crap.

If replaced his stereo with the Hi-Fi, maybe I could buy his old stereo on the cheap?...

Once upon a time, journalism was, arguably, something to pay attention to, but those times are long gone...

He could do a real review if he got an iPod HiFi boombox and did some field testing, but since he's just trolling for hits, it is obvious he won't.
Besides, his "article" is full of ad hominem attacks that shows his poor logic...
Another troller, move on folks.

"full of ad hominem attacks"

Yeah! What the heck does he have against grits anyway? (j/k)

First of all, I didn't read the Inquirer article, I am going by Mac Daily News' comments about it. You will understand why as you read the rest of this. All of the drivel about the Mac and gullible iPod users etc. is just that, drivel, meaningless chatter. As for the iPod HiFi, I don't know how it sounds. Does anyone yet? With the right engineering it could sound good, think Bose Wave Radio: the first time I came across one of those, I was in a room full of beautiful sound and it took me a while to find that little Wave Radio which was making all of it. I'm still doubtful the HiFi can replace the stereo image I get from my installation which receives its audio input from an Airport Express. You do have to understand the difference between marketing and reality.

What this bozo Andrew Thomas and the rest of the Inquirer crew know is gullibility. They rely on it daily in order to show their advertisers the page counts on their articles. I haven't seen from them a positive comment about anything Apple has done in years. So I simply don't ever go to their site. I'm not interested in helping them get paid.

Once upon a time, expensive Macs were, arguably, more stable than the WinTel equivalents, but those times are long gone... Apple's given up and gone over to Intel processors. It's given up its own operating system and bolted a pretty GUI on an ancient OS called UNIX.

Ha! Is this maroon talking about OS9-? Did he ever use OS9? Jeebus on a stick, that was the most unstable piece of crap evar! Sure, it was still better than Windows but I still hated it. Nothing like rebooting 8 times a day during normal operation. Or 20 if you had to do any troubleshooting for extension conflicts. The only way to have more fun was if it happened with a deadline standing on your neck.

THE authority:

If you think the $350 price is reasonable, go buy one.

If looking up a definition in Wikipedia is you're idea of becoming an authority, we'd have nothing to talk about.

Something interesting for the audiofiles:
http://www.macnightowl.com/index.htm#facts

A QUESTION for you: Would you take seriously any form of journalism from a guy who looks like he'd clobber your mother for her purse?

"....or imaging or even the benefits of valves over transistors.

TUBES RULE! - Too bad I can't afford a high-end tube amp. Tubes are warmer sounding, more 3-d and just reproduce sound better. Give me a tube amp, a good platter with a high-end needle with some thick ass vinyl and you've got SOUND.

But, being more expensive to produce (making tubes is also a highly toxic process), the industry changed and time marches on....

Even though the CD is still a digital medium I can still notice a HUGE difference between DDD and AAD - AAD sounds better because it ORIGINAL source is analog.

"In fact, aside from the fact that most people can't even hear outside of the range specified...."

The low E on a standard 4-string bass is around 40Hz.
The low B on a 5-string bass is around 30 I believe.

Ok, so nothing I said relates to this thread, if you're still reading this far you are a glutton for punishment.

Spongy provided the link to yet another writer who doesn't get it: http://www.macnightowl.com/index.htm#facts

The complaints people are making are about the Hi-Fi's value. The audio specs are only part of the argument.

I've yet to read anyone doubting that the iPod Hi-Fi will produce decent sound suitable for offices or dorm rooms. No one doubts the thing will work seamlessly with the iPod. But Apple priced this plastic box at half the cost of a Mac Mini and at the price of a complete 1000 watt JVC 5.1 home stereo system from Best Buy: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7033505&type=product&productCategoryId=pcmcat40200050002&id=1099395276778, so it is perfectly acceptable to hold the Hi-Fi up to the standards of other $350 audio systems currently available.

This author addresses the Hi-Fi's published audio shortcomings by making the typical half-cocked observation: "Forgetting that most adults can't hear a 20 kilohertz signal..." Yeah, fine. But the author conveniently omits that most adults CAN hear when that 20KHz signal is NOT present. The high harmonics are what give a sense of space, air, and realism to a recording.

I love people who read in their automobile owner's manual how to operate the accelerator pedal and then believe they're fully prepared to compete in the Indy 500.

When dismissing the frequency range of the Hi-Fi as unimportant to the product's value, none of these overnight authorities bother to address that pesky 6db total wiggle room of ± 3dB. For those in the know, that is a pretty sloppy spec. But in La La Land, inferior specs aren't significant when home stereo has been reinvented.

The author (who apparently monitored this and other threads at MDN) goes on to say: "In the real world, if the specs are realistic, it's a lot better than you have a right to expect from the price."

So $350 is a bargain for this system? I'm so glad I don't live in his real world. Apple marketing does tend to blind people.

Elsewhere, I provided links to several technologically and sonically superior powered speaker systems costing less money. Products that actually have value commensurate with their prices. Some of these products have been used to create the music Apple sells at its iTunes store.

This author can't be bothered with value comparisons. He goes on to insult anyone who has ever chosen between pissing money away or spending money wisely when he writes: "But it may be good enough for most people, who don't think the audible difference makes a difference."

Yup. $350 of no difference. Piss away, Gene Steinberg.

What is it with faggot Mac fanbois who are too scared to flame me using their real email addresses?

Pussies.

(no offence intended)

Andrew

Sheesh that shut them up

Here's the extremely intelligent, well thought out reply a Mac Fanboi wrote to Andrew Thomas...

Start Quote:
"what a f***n homo you gay biatch, windows is batty because lets face it, the viruses and the spyware etc. Mac OS X to the day has only two known malicious softwares. So get your gay windows machine and live under a rock so no-one can attack you with viruses you gay homo. You are dumb beyond your years so go shove a stick up your a*se and go live with you windows mates you dumb b*stard p**ck"
End Quote:

Andrew, I just wanted to let you know this doesn't represent the average intelligence of Mac users in general thank God!!