After using the iPhone, I can tell you there will be no touchscreen iPod - Macenstein

After using the iPhone, I can tell you there will be no touchscreen iPod

After having now experienced the iPhone for a couple days, I feel I can now safely predict that we will never see the mythical “touchscreen, widescreen, Wi-Fi iPod.” Feel free to quote me.

Back when Apple first announced the iPhone, I thought it was a very cool piece of gadgetry, and I knew I would one day buy it. However, what I really wanted was the widescreen, touch-sensitive Wi-Fi-enabled video iPod that all the rumor sites had been predicting (apparently based on iPhone-related patents) for years… the iPhone without the phone, if you will. Rumor sites showed diagrams of virtual click wheels on a touch-sensitive widescreen screen, and it looked awesome.

However, after using the iPhone for about 3 days, my bubble has been burst. It just ain’t gonna happen folks. If you are holding out on buying an iPhone because you are waiting on this mythical iPod, you might as well grab your $600 and head over to the Apple Store, because the iPhone is as close as you are gonna get.

Now, don’t get me wrong. Three days in and I am already in love with the iPhone. Zooming into and out of photos and web pages, checking e-mail, watching widescreen movies… just about everything about it is great. (Well, there ARE about 40 minor things I wish were different or I feel are missing, but I am confident many of these will be addressed in the coming months). In general, the iPhone is as good an implementation of the smart phone idea as we have seen to date, and it’s only going to get better. I do not regret my buying decision.

However, if I had to find a “fault” with the iPhone, it would be that the iPhone is more phone than iPod. I know, it is called the iPHONE for a reason, but hear me out. The touchscreen interface works quite well for using the iPhone as a phone and for typing messages, zooming around photos, and navigating web pages. However, the one thing these tasks all have in common is they are things you need to be looking at your iPhone to do (yes, I know some negligent A-holes out there dial and even text while driving, but for the most part people do not… I hope).

On the other hand, the touchscreen does not work all that well for an iPod user (or at least, THIS iPod user). Here are the problems with using the iPhone as an iPod as I see them, and in my opinion, these are the reasons Apple cannot release a touchscreen video iPod anytime soon:

First and foremost, the touchscreen necessitates you look at the iPhone in order to do anything. This becomes an issue in two scenarios I encounter every day. First, while driving. A large percentage of iPod users use their iPods in the car, myself included. Currently, I spend my commute (and much of my day) listening to bookmarkable recordings of the Howard Stern show I record off Sirius using Audio Hijack. On my standard iPod, when I hit a commercial, I can feel for the central “button”, then scroll around with my finger until about 8 minutes have passed, all without taking my eyes off the road or my iPod out of its cradle. On the iPhone, however, you cannot blindly reach out and do any type of fast forwarding, because you have to have a fairly precise finger placement to activate any buttons, and multiple taps are involved in bringing up the progress slider.

Additionally, the lack of a scroll wheel makes it much harder to fast forward audio tracks, especially long ones such as audio books. Each of my Stern recordings is 6 hours long. On a standard iPod, you can easily scroll a short, precise distance with one revolution of your finger around the click wheel. On the wheel-less iPhone, you must move forward or back in a track by dragging a time slider with your finger, similar to the progress slider in QuickTime or iTunes. The problem is, it is very imprecise. Whether you have a 3-minute song or a 6-hour audio book, you only have about 2.5 inches of a progress bar that represents the entire length of the track. So a very small movement of your finger can jump you 15-25 minutes or more ahead when you only wanted to move 2 minutes. To help combat this, I have set Audio Hijack to split up each of Howard’s 6 -hour shows into three 2-hour files, but this is not a perfect solution, and fast forwarding still takes a little patience and quite a bit of focus to do correctly. This means (safely) navigating files while driving is out of the question.

Now, I realize my situation is a little unique, as most iPod users probably are not navigating audiobooks on their driving commutes, however most in-car iPod users DO like to do little things like pause tracks, adjust volume, or skip songs while driving, and really none of these things can be done safely on a touchscreen iPod. Apple is not likely going to want to deal with the resulting lawsuits from negligent/dead drivers who do not heed any warning stickers Apple chooses to slap on such a device.

The second scenario that will cause many “would-be touch screen iPod users” trouble is exercising with such a device. Imagine a normal iPod in a sport armband case. While running, you can reach up to your shoulder and easily skip a song, pause it, fast forward etc.. Now imagine a buttonless touchscreen iPod in the same scenario. Armbands traditionally are worn on the outside of the arm, away from your line of sight. iPhone accessory makers have already made arm bands for the iPhone, and while I have not purchased one yet, I DO know that using one would necessitate stopping in the middle of a run, or at least slowing to a walk to do any type of iPod navigation.

Even if you held such an iPod in your hand while running, pausing the device would require you to tap at least twice on the device (once to wake the screen, once to pause), and you would have to look to find the pause button.

One could argue that a runner should make an awesome “running” playlist loaded with favorite songs that requires no navigation or skipping, but I think that is being a bit apologetic to the idea of the touchscreen iPod. The reality is people like to hear different songs when in different moods or parts of a workout, and it will become a problem. In fact, the iPod designed specifically for workouts (the Shuffle) has no display at all, and is built to be used solely by touch. You could be blind and use it.

There are many smaller daily scenarios where navigating an iPod without seeing it come into play, and I think we currently just take them for granted. If you have ever walked the streets of New York with your iPod in the winter, you likely have enjoyed the ability to skip or pause a song without removing your hand from a pocket. You can even wear gloves. But not on a touchscreen iPod.

On thing I personally do is listen to my iPod at night, sometimes while the Bride of Macenstein is sleeping beside me. I often keep the iPod under the covers when skipping songs, so the bright light doesn’t wake her or temporarily blind me (you’d be surprised how bright an iPod’s display is in a pitch black room). It is easy to skip songs and adjust volume, shut the iPod off without looking at it, but based on the iPhone, this will not be the case with a touchscreen iPod.

There are probably a bunch more examples, but you get the point. Anything that is inconvenient to operate is not going to be a commercial success, and Apple knows this. they have inf act, built their entire business around this idea.

The Sum Up

The point here is that while Apple may one day release a touchscreen iPod, it will not be any day soon. I’m not ruling out a widescreen video iPod (for those of you who enjoy putting off purchasing current tech in the hopes of a new mystery product) but it is not going to have a touchscreen, or at least not one like the iPhone’s where it is the sole method of navigation. I can almost see Steve wanting to throw in a touch screen just to support iTunes’ Coverflow view since it so dominates Leopard, but at the same time this move would add unnecessary cost and a confusing double-navigation system that I don’t see Apple going for. Too much of the iPod’s usefulness and appeal relies on its effortless navigation without the need for visually identifying touch points. Driving and exercising, two popular activities for iPod users, would be made potentially dangerous, and perhaps even more importantly to consumers, difficult and inconvenient.

I feel confident in making this prediction, one that will perhaps come back to haunt me (be sure to bookmark this page to let me have it one day). While some may say “Well, Apple should make a touchscreen version for those of us who want it, and still keep the regular iPod for the rest”, that traditionally hasn’t been Apple’s style. The iPod line is already approaching bloatware-levels with various models and choices. Adding a high-end touchscreen iPod to the line-up will not be the runaway success we all thought it might be. If you don’t believe me, pick up an iPhone, and use it as you iPod for a couple days.

37 Responses to “After using the iPhone, I can tell you there will be no touchscreen iPod”
  1. Tommy Boy says:

    I agree with most of this. I think I saw some patents once on some site for a widescreen iPod design where buttons were along the top, like on the metal bezel, and I think those too were supposed to be touch sensitive, but I don’t remember. The more I think about it, the more I think you are right in that some of them have to be “real” buttons in order to work as a total replacement for the current 5G models.

  2. MattD says:

    Is there a reason you don’t an inline headphone button would work? Obviously, for the car that is not an option, but I’ve been wearing the headphones that came with the iPhone and the double squeeze to skip a song is great along with the single squeeze to pause a song.

    The squeeze feature works great for me and I like the the fact that this solution offers no substantial bulk to the iPhone.

    Early iPod models had an inline remote that worked great. I used to use it driving and for other activities all the time. My guess is we will see more inline remote features in the future.

  3. Kevin says:

    I agree — it is next to impossible to navigate tracks without looking at the screen. And regarding the iPhone as is, I think people will be reluctant to workout with a device that offers so much functionality. I myself am too nervous to workout with this sucker. One drop and you could be out of a phone, a state of the art ipod, a web browser, a pda, and everything else.

    And regarding the purported immunity of the iPhone to cracking on impact, it ain’t true. My friend dropped his from his lap getting out of the car and the glass shattered. Good news: Apple replaced it.

  4. Tim says:

    I have to disagree with you.

    Why do Apple make a Video iPod, a iPod nano, and an iPod shuffle?

    Because they all have a different role to play, and a wide screen player designed mainly for movies (but of course it would play music) would fit well into their line up.

    Someone who listens to their iPod while exercising isn’t going to be watching movies on it at the same time as they are running. They want something Flash based (for shock protection) and something small they can strap to their arm. The Nano.

    Someone who wants to travel with all their music (or a very large subsection of their music) are going to want something with a HDD for capacity. While smaller = better, the added bulk over a Nano is worth dealing with because of the capacity they are after. While it is more than possible to watch videos on this sized screen (I do it all the time on my Zen Vision:M (yes the heathen that I am)).

    Then there is the shuffle, just want a couple of songs (well a bunch), don’t care what, don’t care how many, just something to make the time pass quicker.

    Now you have people who want to watch videos. Ripped ones, and ones bought through iTunes. What are they going to do? At the moment they probably own a Video iPod, cursing at the small 4:3 screen, screaming out for something new, other than capacity this line hasn’t been updated in a long time. Bright screen and games don’t count. Of course they could also be using one of the many 16:9 players out there made by Archos, or Creative.

    So people who use their player while exercising. They can’t use a touch screen when it is on their shoulder. But I can’t see why they would want to move away from their Nanos they currently use, especially if they have the Nike thingy to go with it.

    That leaves drivers. For most people who just plug it in and let it play, occasionally skipping tracks the touch screen isn’t a huge hindrance. I understand that the controls can be imprecise when trying to scroll through length tracks, but these aren’t reasons Apple wont make one, these are reasons why you wont buy on.

  5. Juan says:

    Yeah I have to agree with you on a lot of this.
    This is well written, non-biased article in my opinion.
    I hadn’t thought of this, but now that I do I like not having to look at my iPod to make volume adjustments, skip tracks, pause it, sleep it, etc.

  6. Paul says:

    Why not put out some ingenious Bluetooth remote control runners could keep in their hand. It could be based on the squeeze method used by the iPhone earbud cable. Something that felt really good and natural to hold. It could also work well for subway rides and walking in the city.

    The driving thing…I don’t know how they’re going to get around that one. Maybe another Bluetooth remote that is basically an iPod click-wheel and nothing else. People are going to want to drive and use their iPhones as iPods.

    Perhaps Apple is handling this with the limitations they put on manufacturers of iPhone and future iPod accesories. Like mounting kits, transmitters, etc.

  7. Michael says:

    Do you really think that would be a reason for Apple to not create a touchscreen iPod? I mean come on! What you need to consider is that the most popular iPod is the nano, one that is not for videos. This iPod will remain with buttons while the video iPod will go touchscreen. The real serious runners who don’t want to stop use an iPod Nano for running, or a shuffle. A video iPod is too bulky for running anyways. Expect a widescreen video iPod (not for me, i bought an iPhone 🙂 )

  8. Scarlet says:

    I understand your points. However you’re making blind assumptions about a product (a widescreen touchscreen iPod) that hasn’t even been invented yet based on your knowledge of the past. Also, your thinking only considers interface evolution and not revolution. If Apple does create a touchscreen iPod (and I believe it will) you can very much believe it will work as expected and work as it should. You assume that a touchscreen interface will never work on an iPod because you have to always be “looking at” the screen to operate the controls. Well, how do you know Apple wouldn’t just build a few extra external buttons on the touchscreen device just for that purpose? How do you know Apple couldn’t simply create an small wearable remote control that controlled the touchscreen unit (like a wristband or something) when you needed to operate the unit without looking? There are plenty of options and possibilities and plenty of ways to accomplish this – when you think outside the box. So stop kicking Apple about things they haven’t even done yet, or making assumptions about things you know nothing of. When you’re thinking revolutionary, instead of evolutionary, then anything is possible. And that’s what makes Apple smart and so great is because they always think outside of the box (that is, in terms of what’s possible, and if it’s not possible, they invent it to make it possible), and not just in terms of the past or what others have already done. If Apple builds a widescreen iPod (and I believe they will, it’s only just a matter of time) you can be sure it’ll work precisely as it should. And just for the record, in my opinion, now that the iPhone has been released, I feel there’s a 99% chance Apple will introduce a widescreen iPod with Multitouch controls sometime in 2008. Why? Because that is what consumers both want and expect. And you can be sure that somewhere within the secret design labs of Apple Inc. they’re working on just such a device right now.

  9. iPhone says:

    Nice written article but I will have to disagree with almost every point. First, having to look at the device to control it is not an issue for the ‘average’ iPod user. Of course this can all be solved by releasing a mini controller attached to the headphones…doesn’t take much thinking.
    Second, the reason this thing is so big is because of its screen. Not very hard to notice. If you want a device with a 3.5 inch screen, guess what? It’s gonna be larger than 3.5 inches big as a device. Now the iPhone has other components inside since it’s, well, a phone. So an iPod would not be as big.
    Further more touch capabilities are very useful even for iPods. iPods dont just play music. They display photos and videos and therefore making touch capabilities very useful.

  10. CF says:

    Personally I think a dock-connected click wheel would be a good idea. Maybe attached to a cable so that it would work as a remote control.

    With a dock connector pass through.

  11. Joe says:

    You are absolutely right. There will not be a touch screen iPod. However there will be a touch screen VIDEO iPod. The Video iPods will be best used for movies and TV shows, The iPods with Video will be best for audio programs but also usable to what video.

  12. Steve says:

    someone has never heard of a pocket remote control me thinks…..

  13. Tom says:

    Good article, but bear in mind that the iPhone has a number of pysical buttons on its side – ringer, volume, power. I don’t see any reason why the ringer switch couldn’t be replaced with a prev/fwd rocker, maintaining tacticle control for when it’s needed.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Coverflow is actually a pretty damn INEFFICIENT method of getting to your music, in my opinion. It is mere Eye Candy, and pretty much the only reason I can think Apple would “need” to make the next iPod a touchscreen. Seems like a lot of extra cost to me, unless they use the SAME screen from the iPhone, which would bring the cost down.

    But personally I’d rather get to my music faster, like list mode. Coverflow is to show off to your friends, but the reality is so far I have not even used it on my iPhone.

  15. Rowlings says:

    The only real reason to add a touch screen that I can see is if Apple makes the next iPod a Wi-Fi device, capable of internet browsing, and I am thinking that is not going to happen, or at least not for 2 years due to AT&T agreements (although in talking to AT&T reps, it sounds like Apple totally controlled all the negotiations on the deal, so maybe AT&T has no say). You would need a touch screen to enter URLS, and send mail, if they let you do that, but otherwise, useless. I never use the photo features of my current iPod, and I severely doubt that enough people NEED to zoom in on photos to warrant a touch screen ipod’s cost.

    Not that I wouldn’t buy one…


  16. JP says:

    I agree Apple needs to have some sort of physical buttons on the inevitable widescreen iPod. As Tommy Boy above said, wasn’t there a ” touch sensitive bezel patent” floating around once? That might work for “scrolling”. Mayeb slide your finger across the side a couple times?

  17. jb says:

    You do not even need an extra piece of hardware to address some of these concerns. Couldn’t Apple simply write a program that you use when you want no-look operation? When you want to use it in such a mode (while driving or exercising, or whatever) you run it. It could be designed to respond to _gestures_: i.e. one tap to pause/play, a circle to go back, a straight line to skip forward, two finger drag to go forward or back within a song . . . Thus, no-look control that is unambiguous is doable via gestures, IMHO.
    I like your takes on some of the limits of the current iPhone, but perhaps you need to “think different” a little?


    Well, I think a touchscreen iPod IS coming, but god, I REALLY hope Apple doesn’t resort to an external remote or inline control to make it work for runners. That is the most inelegant solution I can think of. And once they start adding SOME physical buttons for easy navigation, like volume or pausing or skip, I fear it is going to start looking like an archos piece of crap player.

    Of course, Apple swouldn’t realease that type of machine, so yes, if an dwhen it comes, there is going to be some sort of happy medium that will satisfy most of us.
    (i hope!)

  19. cocoy says:

    doc, i got to agree with you on the points you raised. i use my ipod the same way you do, listening to it while driving and/or commuting.

    maybe they won’t move multi-touch to the nanos and the shuffles just for the big ipod videos. a multi-touch one would be great for a new video ipod because as much as i’d like an iphone (sadly, not living in the us)… i’d much rather have an iphone sans the phone… and maybe it’ll be a far different user experience than the iphone, more adapted for listening to music while on the go.

    maybe apple will surprise us one day because they’re still workin on delivering a great user experience for a brand new multi-touch ipod (not just because it’ll steal the iphone’s thunder right now, if they did launch it). at this point, who the heck knows right? doesn’t stop any of us from dreaming about what’s next. 🙂

  20. Constable Odo says:

    I say there will be an iPod with multi-touch. Don’t you realize they could design a virtual clickwheel that works the same as a standard iPod. Of course, there’s still the possibility of mechanical buttons and a remote for those that don’t want to look at their iPods while changing selections or whatever.

    Still, it’s too early to tell, but I’m guessing that the iPhone concept will be carried to the iPods. Why waste all that R&D for just one product. I’m certainly looking forward to a multi-touch widescreen iPod. In any case, I’ll still have my 30 GB iPod w/Video to use as a backup.

    Well, at least you allow the possibility you might be wrong. Too many people write articles as if they know the future for certain.

  21. Robert B says:

    The iPhone’s mic has control functions that could migrate to a touch screen iPod. I doubt that Apple will avoid utilizing the touch screen functions on a number of products, including iPods. It’s going to be an interesting year of new product developments from Cupertino.

  22. Slackintosh says:

    Very well written article, I agree with all of your points except to say that I do believe we will see a touchscreen ipod. I enjoy not having to look at my ipod to control it, and I think the only reason we are forced to look at the iphone for controls is because of the complexity of the device, the fact that our fingers need to familiarise themselves with so many different potential button positions etc….What if, and I’m sure Apple is doing this, the touch sensitive controls that dealt with play, pause, volume, FF, RW etc….were located along the sides of the device, within the metal body for instance. You wouldn’t need a them to be on screen functions per se because a visual connection isn’t required for those inputs, by nature of being located along the sides, your hands may never need to touch the screen and when in a pocket, all you’ll need to figure out is the front or back of the device and instinct will take care of the rest, sliding a finger up the edge to increase volume, down to decrease, tap to pause, double tap to skip etc….The screen could then be used as a more traditional ipod touch screen interface including coverflow and so on….As for cars, bluetooth anyone, integrated stero harnesses, maybe I’m fortunate but I keep an old 40gig ipod in the glove box and haven’t even looked at it for two or three months, I control the whole thing through my steering wheel controls and through the stereo screen…..

  23. Jorge H. Padilla says:

    First time reader here.

    Awesome article.

    But I wouldn’t get too worried about this. Let me explain.

    The iPhone is still in early stages and many refinements can and will be made. The interface thank God is very easy to improve and modify and Apple, different from other celular phone vendors, really DOES listen to their users. It will be interesting to say the least. Apple is paying attention to people who realize that their iPhone will be their be-all end-all cel phone-media player-PDA center. I know mine will (when it comes to Mexico that is :s). My only real problem is 8 gigabytes is NOT enough.

    Many would think that trying to do so much in so little space will make for a confusing product. And all the cel phones and blackberries up to this point have proven this point.

    But take a look at the mp3 players BEFORE the iPod. They were ugly, bulky and difficult gadgets that nonetheless had a good idea behind them. Apple took that and made it into something anyone could use, enjoy and covet. Now after the iPod many “logical” steps took place, look at this: first they included contacts, then games, then color, then video… And what was next? Cel phone!!! Why? Well…

    Just look at celphones! Awesome idea, poor execution. And if you saw a person you would see them with their celphone and with an iPod… Both on their belts or some other part of their body. The iPod is cool enough to leave hanging out, not the celphone. But looks is not the issue here, it is convergence!

    The iPod’s interface screamed to be upgraded, improved and put to even more uses. Apple saw this and took its time to make everything fit: cel phone, ipod, pda… and most importantly INTERNET!! And not just internet lamed down to blackberrie depts but REAL Internet. Real browser. Fast response. Connect anywhere, EDGE or no EDGE.

    What the iPhone is its a bona-fide Revolution. Not an evolution of already existing things. Why? Because NOBODY has done anything like this in its execution. No, no, they haven’t. We’re not talking concepts here people, but real life use.

    The iPhone is not an iPod? I COMPLETELY agree. But does this mean that Apple will not try to apply the screen or whatever it has learned from their product’s use with their customers to a new, BETTER iPod? I don’t think so.

    If they don’t well… We’ll still have the iPhone.

  24. dropd says:

    c’mon its not that hard to see a bluetooth click wheel coming is it?

  25. Harvey says:

    While I agree with your assertion that “there will be no touchscreen iPod” based on the iPhone, there’s nothing written in stone that Apple has to make a touchscreen iPod that is the exact copy of the iPhone, but without the phone functionality.

    Remember that Apple recently patented a touch interface that uses the edges (as well as the front) of a handheld to control volume, track, and pause without having to look at the device.

    I’m pretty sure this was designed for inclusion in the next generation iPod. So, do I think that a touchscreen iPod is coming soon (before Christmas)? Definitely!

  26. Kebab says:

    Why would you have an video iPod and not watch the screen? Excuse me for saying so, but I think you have a very different pattern of use than the average user. Video iPods are for watching video, pictures and playing music. You use these when you vant to watch the screen. If you want an iPod for music and downloaded Hooward Sterns, you go with an iPod nano.

    Of course there will be a touchscreen iPod video – because for video you watch the screen.

  27. David says:

    I see the following markets:

    1. Tiny device with no screen
    2. Small, light device with color screen
    3. High capacity device with music and movie playback
    4. iPhone
    5. iPhone without the phone part
    6. High capacity iPhone without the phone part

    Apple currently covers 1, 2 and 4. They used to have 3 covered too, but the current iPod is barely adequate for TV and hopeless for wide screen content.

    Demand for 5 clearly exists because people with more money than I do are buying iPhones and immediately canceling their phone service simply to get the big screen and internet features.

    I think the logical move is to stay in the $249-349 price range with an iPod that remains just a music, photo and video device, but offers a much bigger screen and therefore has a revised interface.

    With Steve Jobs in control I can’t see Apple producing 5 or 6 regardless of the apparent demand.

  28. delbert chan says:


    that is assuming that the video ipod would be a brand new ipod, not meant to replace the current video ipod (the 5G). If Apple released a brand new widescreen touchscreen iPod, marketed specifically to movie watching, then yes, I guess it could be all touch. I just don’t think the iPod market can take that many varieties. Although maybe that would be good, as then the “regular” 5G iPods would have to drop in price about $100…

  29. Mister says:

    I whole-heartedly disagree!

    There will be a widescreen iPod – and they will solve all of your issues by incorporating a VIRTUAL CLICK-WHEEL (ala the Virtual Keyboard ) on the iPhone.

    I seem to remember seeing a prototype (not apples) but still there on wikipedia
    (picture here);

  30. sqrd says:

    Wrong. First, people who operate their iPods scrolling and moving through tunes blindly while driving are a distinct minority. More and more, car manufacturers have dedicated interfaces that allow communication with iPod menus with visual feedback–the presence of buttons on the iPod is irrelevant for such interfaces.

    Regarding runners, the situation is simple. Apple can easily create an inline remote control (making it optional, if needed) for individuals who need more complete control of their iPod while running. Apple had such a remote for their early iPods, and I see no reason why they wouldn’t do this again. I also agree withe the comment above about a virtual click-wheel interface.

    There will definitely be a touchscreen iPod released within the next six months. I’m guessing they’ll let enough time go by so that the early adopters will have purchased iPhones–I’ll pick my touchscreen iPod then, as I’m salivating for that even more than an Apple phone.

  31. mark says:

    Disagree though we may not see it this year. Here’s why:
    1. Virtual click wheel on touch screen – seen in Apple patent submissions. Also tactile feedback could be coming soon.
    2. Remote with all the necessary functions – note the remote that comes with the iPhone already has additional functions; this could be the same for the iPod (minus the phone features)
    3. Voice input since – when voice dialing arrives, voice-activated functions will come with it, and it will be used for both the iPhone and iPod.

  32. Gil says:

    Adding to Marks comments. Tactile feedback already exists in working products today. Alpine Electronics has a line of Touchscreen in dash dvd players that has such a technology and it works.

  33. jt says:

    I don’t think I saw anyone mention this.. you can also FF/Rewind by touching and holding the next/previous track buttons. You still have to look at it to use them, but it’s a lot easier than using the slider. The rate also increases the longer you hold it

  34. imajoebob says:

    Excellent analysis. The iPod is great not because of the visual interface (well, not just because of it), but because of the tactile experience. Whether it’s the faux clicking of the wheel, the positive-click feed back of the buttons, or even the touch sensitive buttons on the G3 (which may still be my favorite), the iPod can be operated in the dark, in your pocket, or in your rucksack without having to glance at it. That’s a key real reason for it’s success.

  35. HOO HOO HEE HEE says:



  36. yeah, you got me Hoo Hoo.
    My article is too long for me to bother re-reading, but I think I say something like, if apple DOES release a touch screen iPod it can’t be the replacement for the current iPod. And it wasn’t.
    But yes, I was wrong, and I should have remembered, where’s there’s rumors, there’s fire.

    -The Doc

  37. ZuDfunck says:

    Your a proper Gent, Doc

    Your smart with class

    I wish you well

Leave A Comment


Click here to inquire about making a fortune by advertising your game, gadget, or site on Macenstein.