aaaa ~

which one ?

ipod touch gua . some of my friend dont support ipod , they said the sound quality suck

iPod Touch for sure. It's the way of the future. That's why they call the other one the "classic"

I read reports that the newer iPods have lousy sound too. Not sure myself, I can't tell the difference even when using my Grado SR60s.

If you want to keep in trend then Ipod Touch

aaaaa ~

all support Touch ~

Touch is good to keep up in trend saja ~
tayang2 kat org ~

Classic better if u are really into music or video ~

hope there's going to be more memory in iPod next gen ~

more = better

This post has been edited by kuit: Oct 3 2007, 11:56 PM

ahahaha i will be sticking with my classic
4gb and 8gb is seriously insufficient and if you want
add another few hundred get iphone but u must have contacts from us la
i'm lusting for the iphone now

Classic for me, Touch for me, nano for me, shuffle for me as well yet iPhone is the best of all

This post has been edited by morgan: Oct 4 2007, 12:06 AM

aaaa ~

i also lyke the iPhone ~
it combine the most succesful thing ~
iPod + Phone ~
it is a lust worthy ~

izzit true dat iPhone doesn't support our network ?
people are talking bout dat a lot ~

a serious Apple Fanboy ~

This post has been edited by kuit: Oct 4 2007, 12:10 AM

Nano - If you do lots of active sport and if you got a Nike+iPod Sport Kit.

Classic - If you must insist to have all your song collection into one device.

Touch - If you want to be the trend to owning such a revolution device.

iPhone - If you really wanted a phone + MP3 + Video being displayed on a nice big screen

Your preference. Even if i do carry 160Gb worth of music, i'll go nuts trying to listen to all of them in one single day. That is why you have iTunes to organize which songs goes to where and when. This way, i can easily organize, and nominate the songs i want to hear one one particular day, into one particular playlist, and only sync that song in. You dont need 160gb or 80gb Classic for that matter to do this. 16Gb Touch is plenty fine.

It's called "Classic" for one other reason too IMO. It's the last in the line, and dying of short breath. With numerous problems with Coverflow, and general lagginess when accessing Coverflow on the Classics, i wouldnt touch it with a 10 foot pole.

i already choose Classic. reason, i need the space.

i know everyone would say, its too much for 1 to listen, but 1 thing is, organize ur music to listen everyday (or frequently) is just weary, for me. i migrate from 20gb to 160gb just for that reason. Mood came suddenly n u need to certain music to go with ur mood, so, u can drop all the hussle or 'regret' for not havin it in ur playlist.

To each his own, which is why i wrote "your preference" in my first post. I can live without listening to a particular song when mood strikes me, or if i need to, i'd stream it off Wifi using the Touch from Seeqpod or my own server back home. Some may need to salvage their sanity with immediate listening to a particular song, other have higher tolerance or can wait until they get back home for their music fix. To each his own.

emm... not to shoot ur post, but i wrote it in my preference



sorry if wat i wrote lead to misunderstanding.

I have the old Ipod 30gb but intend to get the Nano 8GB.
Although price differences with the Classic is just RM200++ for a better storage and bigger screen, I have no choice but to get the Nano.

Reason is simply because physical size does matter for me and the light & slim factor suit my outdoor needs (Running & outdoor nature activities).

simple

for large capacity go for ipod classic

if u want the new touch screen interface, get the Touch

simple right?

but tough choices

Yeah, cause RM1k can get either one so it's hard to choose. I'll go with Touch!

ipod touch...since it is new technology compare to old ipod classic technology

iPod Touch, anytime

Consensus says....... what again?

I was initially considering the Classic due to the roomier storage space, but the whole lag issue with Coverflow was the killjoy im not really wanting to face. My music rarely gets bloated more than over 30Gb, so my old iPod Video of the last gen marked at 30Gb more than covers it. Had the entire Harry Potter 1-7 audiobooks , all Dan Brown audiobooks plus all my tunes , and still have 7Gb to spare. I guess i rotate my songs more often, to the point where i dont stick and keep the old ones and having to carry them with me. Sure, i have oldies and favourites, but i'd like to keep my music contemporary. I have no qualms whatsoever to those who wants to keep all your songs with you, it is just that my principles is that i keep only what i plan to listen to, so then capacity i need most definitely wont even be more than the 30Gb. Heck, take a good look at your iTunes and see how it takes to listen to all the songs if you so. 400+ songs already take 1.1 days! Im not really planning to listen to them while im working, in the toilet doing my business , or while im sleeping......unless it helps with getting deep REM sleep i need.

Again, to each their own.

Then again, i'd think that if you are really hardcore with your music, you wouldnt be picking iPods as your primary DAP, you'd be splooging over the Creative Zens or even the older iRivers, with better bitrates, and audio reproductions.

I guess the extra capacity doesn't have any big influence on the amount of music you store. It matters more for video storage IMO. This is because for the 8gb Touch, you wouldn't be able to store much video.

3gbs for music and you would be left with 5gb for videos. That would be only 2 seasons of tv series at the most. So if you're not really into the looks of ipod, you gotta decide if you would want :

1) Touch : Bigger video screen but have to keep deleting/restoring new videos

2) Classic: Smaller video screen but have the luxury of selecting any video depending on your mood and not having to decide what to put into your ipod. Just dump everything in.

I am going for the Classic as i am a lazy person