“A big reason for the success of Apple Computer’s iPod is that it’s designed to do one thing — play music — really well. I recently had a look at the newest iPod and some of its hard-drive-based competitors and quickly came to the conclusion that the product that does least does it best. Extra functions are nice, but they come at a price in usability,” Stephen H. Wildstrom writes for BusinessWeek.
“Until you turn it on, the new iPod photo ($499 with a 40-gigabyte drive) looks just like a standard iPod, although it’s a tad thicker. The color display is much brighter and easier to read than the regular monochrome screen, but aside from that, its music-player functions are identical to those of its older brother. What’s new is the ability to download pictures — from iPhoto on a Macintosh or Adobe Photoshop Album on Windows — and display them on the 2-sq.-in. screen,” Wildstrom writes.
“The problem is the display. It’s just a bit bigger than a 35mm slide, and the screen provides relatively low resolution, a little more than half the pixel density of the new palmOne Treo 650. So the pictures are tiny and don’t look very good. You can hook up the iPod to a television and get a slide show with music if you’re willing to fuss a bit. All in all, I’m not sure the photo feature is worth an extra $100,” Wildstrom writes.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: We want iPod photo for the color screen (and the greater battery capacity). Sure, we’ll use the photo features, but even if we used it “only” as a traditional iPod, we’d rather have the color screen for album art, better readability, nicer solitaire, and just plain better looks. The extra $100 is easily worth it to us.