“Because it is Apple, speculation is running high about what the iconic tech company will unveil next,” Swisher reports. “And most of it centers around the blinging of the iPod Touch to bring it into line with many of the features on the iPhone.”
Advertisement: Protect your iPad with the invisibleSHIELD.
“That is likely to include a front- and rear-facing camera, which would allow the device to use FaceTime, Apple video-calling software that works over Wi-Fi,” Swisher reports. “There could also be an A4 processor in the iPod, which will give the even more oomph.”
Swisher reports, “Other rumors run the gamut, such as a new cloud-based, streamy rethink of Apple TV (possible and exciting), a smaller iPad (silly and unlikely) and a streaming music service (useful and most likely).”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: She forgot to mention the new iPod touch’s Retina display, but Gruber didn’t.
How is it that all you “smart ” Apple faboys don’t know fact from hot air?
Breeze is 100% right – Apple lossless is inferior to 16 bit 44.1kHz.
I guess ignorance is bliss and you’re never interested in the truth.
breeze, Ptoducer
You guys have no clue, lossless compression (like apple’s lossless audio format) are lossless, meaning that they reproduce the exact same bit stream as the original.
This can be achieved by numerous algorithms (lempel-ziv likely being the most well known) and is also used in compressing applications and other types of data.
Uncle Fester’s cousin:
You are absolutely 100% wrong. This is my field of expertise.
Uncle Fester’s cousin:
Another way for you to find out that you’re wrong is to compare the file sizes of a song in losselss vs 16bit wav or aiff @ 44.1kHz…
1 minute of full res stereo = 10 MB
breeze
Dude, you are clueless, Lossless compression is just that, it is commonly used in computer programs and data (ie .zip files, which use LZ as one of the available compression algorithms BTW) where the resultant uncompressed data must exactly match the original.
It (lossless) is also commonly used on audio and video files, where again the resulting (decompressed) stream is -EXACTLY- the same as the original.
Comparing the compressed and original streams and stating “see they aren’t the same size” indicates you don’t have a clue about programming nor digital audio recording
Uncle Fester’s cousin:
You my friend are a complete idiot.
Compression by definition is just that.
Just like jpeg ( compressed vs Raw files.
Anytime you compress audio, you alter the integrity of the original file and full dynamic range.
Yes, lossless compression is commonly used but don’t let the name fool you – it’s fidelity is not anywhere as good as 16 bit or 24 bit Wav @44.1kHz.
Fortunately for the audio world, audio is a science that wasn’t subject to baseless dumbed down e-idiot standards and posturing.
If you sit down and A B one vs another on a real stereo system that are able to reproduce full spectrum audio and full bandwidth fidelity, you’ll see that it’s easy to hear the difference even with mediocre ears and hearing.
Is Google making you stupid?
( http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/6868/)
I have engineered and produced more albums than you’ve probably ever even listened to.
Dude you need to educate yourself a bit
Compression has nothing to do with depth or rate. Compression can be applied (with more or less compression efficiency depending on the structure and redundancy present in the data) to any data in any format.
Simply spewing digital audio rates and resolutions, and then claiming golden ear status is stupid, and easily refutable The (audio) data coming out of a lossless compress/decompress cycle is exactly the same as what went in.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lossless_data_compression
You may indeed be a “musician” but you are no engineer, I can guarantee that.
Uncle Fester’s cousin:
You’re not worth the effort – the best you can do is is rely on wikipedia, which is now formerly a disqualifier in any educational institution .
Yes I am an audio engineer and producer and have many years of experience at it with the best of them.
By the way, did you know that Jerry Lee Lewis after marrying his 12 year ld cousin never had kids because he didn’t want them named Uncle Fester’s cousin?
Breeze:
I was almost willing to take you word on it, and accept that “Apple Lossless Compression” was somehow cheating and not actually “Lossless”; but now I see you arguement is based on filesize, you show yourself to be absolutely clueless.
Lets try simple math:
4 + 4 + 4 + 4 = 16
or
4 x 4 = 16
Both give you EXACTLY the same result, 16, but one can be written down in half the space (2:1 compression). You are effectively claiming you can tell the difference between 16 and 16 when one is arrived at via addition and one is arrived at via multiplication.
Nonsense.
Sometimes it makes sense to write out 4 + 4 + 4 + 4, because not everyone understands multiplication or can multiply very fast. In this case, the math is way more complicated than addition and multiplication, but the net effect is the same; the bare CD said 16, Apple lossless will say 16. If you export the Apple Lossless BACK to CD format, the result will be a bit-for-bit identical song. That is exactly what LOSSLESS means, there is NO LOSS OF DATA.
Geek:
If true to your name and you have good ears, listen for youself on a good stereo reproducing system ( not plastic). Don’t take anyone’s word. If you’re interested in fact.
Geek:
Read properly, I said ” another way ” to check I’d file size…by no means a substitute for proof of performance. I’m done on the topic .
breeze
This,
http://www.answers.com/topic/lossless-compression
Is less technical (then the wiki on lossless compression) and more specific to audio, perhaps it will help you understand the basic concepts involved.
Or not, your choice.
Fester:
It’s all technical you backwards hick.
Ptoducer,
Insults aside, that is not very technical, I would think most grade schoolers could comprehend it.
Perhaps it just seems very technical to you.
Festered:
Get some real education, where you have to study learn retIn and then practice hands on for years, you are a typical molested wiki head that would have no right of passage practising any specialized proffesion.
” you would think”? Ha what a novel concept you inbred ignoramus – Pro audio is an exact technical science idiot.
When your generation is left to survive the planet, your real skills will be evident and you’ll all be up shit’s creek without a paddle. Go play with your sister now and remaber she’s only 8.
Google, wikipedia and answers.com will never make you more than a smart ass who’s ignorance is evident to anyone that has real educated skills. Look in the mirror inbred festered.
Ptoducer,
dude do you think we can’t tell that Ptoducer and breeze are the same person? (same tone, poor usage, grammar and sentence structure)
Dude give up on the hate and adolescent insults, it only damages you.
You were dead wrong about lossless compression, admit it (at least to yourself) and move on. It is a good life lesson.