iPod nano

[John L]

What concerns me most about iTunes is the particular AAC format that they use. I imagine that it SHOULD be possible to transfer AACs into MP3s that can be used for non-Apple applications. But does anybody have a program to do that?

[Gary]

FWIW, My nano is just fine.

←

Same here. I've been using mine all week with no problems (yet).

[neveronfriday]

This suggests that only a smaller number of NANOs has problems.

Apple admits ...

[.:.impossible]

What concerns me most about iTunes is the particular AAC format that they use.  I imagine that it SHOULD be possible to transfer AACs into MP3s that can be used for non-Apple applications.  But does anybody have a program to do that?

←

I've never used the AAC format. I always rip to VBR MP3. You have control over your bit rate as well.

[John L]

What concerns me most about iTunes is the particular AAC format that they use.  I imagine that it SHOULD be possible to transfer AACs into MP3s that can be used for non-Apple applications.  But does anybody have a program to do that?

←

I've never used the AAC format. I always rip to VBR MP3. You have control over your bit rate as well.

←

...and you can transfer those to the iPod with no problem?

[.:.impossible]

No problem!

[rostasi]

What concerns me most about iTunes is the particular AAC format that they use.  I imagine that it SHOULD be possible to transfer AACs into MP3s that can be used for non-Apple applications.  But does anybody have a program to do that?

←

Hi John. The AAC format is good if you want good clear sound

that won't take up a lot of room on your hard drive.

You have control over the bit rate just like MP3s and they are perfect for iPods.

Of course, if you plan on playing a burned disc of tunes on, let's say, a standalone CD player,

then that's where you'll run into probs. At the moment, there is only one company that

allows you to play AAC files on their car stereos for instance, so you may want to consider

using MP3 as your choice if you want to break out some.

Also, you never want to convert AAC into MP3s because you'll be removing more of the sound.

It'll sound terrible. Best to go straight from the original recording.

Rod

Edited September 28, 2005 by rostasi

[John L]

Thanks, guys. For me, that is good news and bad news. For some stupid reason, I had always assumed that the iPod itself was only compatible with AAC. The bad news is that I already have almost 200 GB of AAC files on my external hard drive and I am not planning on duplicating that effort.

I guess the final good news is that Apple probably isn't going to go bankrupt any time soon.

[Guy Berger]

The proprietary format is one of the many lame things about Apple.

[rostasi]

The proprietary format is one of the many lame things about Apple. 

←

Yeah, and the Prius is one of the lame things about Toyota.

Sorry John that you made that assumption about the iPod and AAC.

AAC is not a proprietary format.

AAC is the audio format connected to the MP4 standard

which was created many years before Apple's introduction.

Because of Apple's forward thinking (and it's popularity amongst audio/video users),

it was thru them that it was introduced to the general consumer.

The good side is that you have better quality files with more stability.

This is great for archiving purposes

(I'm not sure if this is what you're doing with your harddrive collection),

but if you're interested in listening on a variety of platforms, then I'd use

a high MP3, AIFF, or WAV for that and make an extra AAC for your archive

(if this is what you're doing).

best,

Rod

Edited September 28, 2005 by rostasi

[John L]

The proprietary format is one of the many lame things about Apple. 

←

Yeah, and the Prius is one of the lame things about Toyota.

Sorry John that you made that assumption about the iPod and AAC.

AAC is not a proprietary format.

AAC is the audio format connected to the MP4 standard

which was created many years before Apple's introduction.

Because of Apple's forward thinking (and it's popularity amongst audio/video users),

it was thru them that it was introduced to the general consumer.

The good side is that you have better quality files with more stability.

This is great for archiving purposes

(I'm not sure if this is what you're doing with your harddrive collection),

but if you're interested in listening on a variety of platforms, then I'd use

a high MP3, AIFF, or WAV for that and make an extra AAC for your archive

(if this is what you're doing).

best,

Rod

←

Thanks, Rod. I don't know quite what you mean by "archiving." I have most of my music in WAV on compact discs and a good part of it ripped in AAC on my external hard drive. I wouldn't have much room to store WAVs or high MP3s any other way.

[rostasi]

Thanks, Rod.  I don't know quite what you mean by "archiving."  I have most of my music in WAV on compact discs and a good part of it ripped in AAC on my external hard drive.   I wouldn't have much room to store WAVs or high MP3s any other way.

Great John! Looks like you're doing what's right for you! By "archiving", I'm just referring to a way that some folks may deal with their collections. Even tho hard copies are available (CDs, DVDs, etc), some folks like to have immediate access to a complete - sometimes huge - collection of their audio. This would be archiving for the casual collector. If you're involved in actually creating sound, then HD collection (as well as DVD audio) can be a great way to go too.

Anyway, it sounds like you've got the situation under control!

best,

Rod

Edited September 28, 2005 by rostasi

[neveronfriday]

This one from CNN today:

Lawsuit claims iPod Nano scratches easily

Monday, October 24, 2005; Posted: 1:39 p.m. EDT (17:39 GMT)

PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania (Reuters) -- Apple Computer Inc. faced a lawsuit that alleged the company knew its Nano portable music player was defective but still decided to press on with the product's release last month.

The credit card-sized Nano, which replaced the best-selling iPod mini and is smaller than the traditional iPod, met with rave reviews. But users quickly started grumbling on Internet message boards that the device's screen scratches too easily.

Consumers have filed a proposed class action lawsuit in San Jose, California, on Wednesday, claiming the Nano scratched "excessively during normal usage" and alleged Apple released the product knowing the problems and led consumers to believe it was durable -- forcing them to shoulder the cost of replacing defective music players.

The complaint blamed the Nano's defectiveness on the film of plastic resin that covers it to protect it from damage. Previous versions of the iPod were coated with thicker and stronger resin, the suit said.

"Rather than admit the design flaw when consumers began to express widespread complaints ... Apple concealed the defect and advised class members that they would need to purchase additional equipment to prevent the screen from scratching excessively," the complaint said.

A spokesman for Apple, whose main offices are in Cupertino, California, could not be reached for comment.

Sales of iPods account for nearly a third of Apple's total sales, and the company has a share of about 75 percent of the U.S. market for all MP3 players. The company's shares, which have soared thanks to overwhelming demand for iPods, hit a new 52-week high of $56.98 on Friday.

Apple admitted in late September that some iPod Nano screens cracked too easily, but blamed that separate issue on vendor quality problems and said it had occurred in less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the Nano sold at that point.

The plaintiff named in the California lawsuit, Jason Tomczak, bought a Nano in September that he said quickly became so scratched he could not view the screen.

Apple replaced that device because of a battery problem, but the complaint said the replacement Nano also became so scratched that Tomczak decided to return it.

The lawsuit will require a judge to grant it class action status. Because Tomczak and other complainants were required to pay a $25 fee to return the Nano, the suit seeks the return of those fees along with the device's original cost and several other forms of damages.

The suit, filed by law firm Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, said Apple has "failed to remedy the problem in any meaningful way" and claimed Apple deleted postings on its Web site that relate to the scratching problem.

Copyright 2005 Reuters.