iPod Touch 5ª Geração

[Racpu_]

Já agora deixo aqui imagens do meu, que já foi vendido...lol

Versão Branca com 32GB

http://imageshack.us/a/img823/313/img20121109164035.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img834/9432/img20121109164051.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img443/6186/img20121109164058.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img254/6154/img20121109164106.jpg

Já agora que acham do novo iPod?

Cumps

[TOPCAT]

eu tenho um mas um nano da geração anterior....

o novo parece muito giro... mas calculo que seja mais do mesmo....

o novo nano... esse sim parece uma evolução no sentido da palavra....

[Dape_1904]

Digam-me uma coisa. O Ipod tem micro e auscultador? Se tiver, graças ao Skype, pode funcionar como telemóvel xD

[Racpu_]

Sim tem...:)

So ouves é por alta-voz, mas o skype funciona.

[Dape_1904]

Então se tudo for à base de wi-fi num futuro próximo ou a médio prazo, mais vale comprar um ipod. Passa a fazer chamadas também, graças ao Skype.

[TOPCAT]

Então se tudo for à base de wi-fi num futuro próximo ou a médio prazo, mais vale comprar um ipod. Passa a fazer chamadas também, graças ao Skype.


na me parece que isso seja pratico.... plo menos porque na tens wifi em todo pais....

fazendo futurulogia parece bem mas na pratica parece-me que ainda demora a la chegar

[Racpu_]

Sim, mas mesmo assim ate termos isso operacional ainda demora, e é se quiserem por ai, pois podem e deve haver muitos interesses em aos operadores manterem o serviço de voz por GSM.

E para não falar que o iPod Touch tinhas que falar em alta-voz ou com kit de mãos livres.

[Dape_1904]

Acredito muito mais que a internet se torne cada vez mais acessível a toda a Humanidade, de graça ou a pagar, do que a Vodafone ou empresa similiar a consiga cobrir com a sua oferta.

[Jorge-Vieira]

iPod lawsuit: Apple deleted songs downloaded from rival music services

In a new twist in the lawsuit that accuses Apple of resorting to unfair tactics to maintain its dominance in the digital music business, the court was informed that the company deleted songs that iPod users had downloaded from rival music services between 2007 and 2009, according to a Wall Street Journal report (http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/12/03/apple-deleted-rivals-songs-from-users-ipods/).
According to plaintiff attorney Patrick Coughlin, whenever users tried to sync their iPod to their iTunes library after downloading music from a competing service like Real Networks’ music store, they would receive an error message instructing them to restore the factory settings. In doing so, the music from rival services would disappear.
Apple directed the system “not to tell users the problem,” Coughlin said.
Defending the practice, Apple security director Augustin Farrugia said that presenting too much information to users would have confused them, something the company didn't want. He told the court that updates that deleted non-Apple music files were aimed at protecting users from hackers and malicious content.
Filed in 2005 by Thomas Slattery, the lawsuit alleges that Apple violated federal antitrust laws as well as California's unfair competition law by not allowing music purchased on the iTunes Music Store from being played on devices other than iPods, and by restricting iPods to play music purchased from other digital music services.



Noticia completa:
http://www.techspot.com/news/59062-ipod-lawsuit-apple-deleted-songs-downloaded-rival-music.html

[Jorge-Vieira]

Apple iPod DRM lawsuit is falling apart (http://www.kitguru.net/apple/matthew-wilson/apple-ipod-drm-lawsuit-is-falling-apart/)


The class action lawsuit launched against Apple over iPod DRM is falling apart as new evidence has come to light, showing that the two named plaintiffs did not actually buy the affected iPod models covered by the lawsuit during the relevant time frame. This case pertains to anti-trust issues, claiming that Apple abused its position in the digital music market to inflate prices.
The lawsuit covers iPods purchased between September 2006 and March 2009, during this time period, Apple used DRM that stopped music from playing on devices if it was purchased outside of iTunes. This meant that Apple could inflate prices in an anti-competitive way.
http://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/iTunes-11-icon-600x600.jpg (http://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/iTunes-11-icon-600x600.jpg)
After lead plaintiff, Marianna Rosen, testified on Wednesday, Apple went and checked the serial numbers and found that she did not buy an iPod until July 2009, months after the relevant time frame. Additionally, the other main plaintiff, Melanie Wilson, did not buy an iPod during the correct time frame.



Noticia completa:
http://www.kitguru.net/apple/matthew-wilson/apple-ipod-drm-lawsuit-is-falling-apart/

[Jorge-Vieira]

iPod lawsuit: Judge orders attorneys suing Apple to find new plaintiffs



http://www.techspot.com/images2/news/header/apple-ipod-lawsuit-steve-jobs.jpgIn an interesting turn of events, a federal judge has decided that the Apple iPod lawsuit that went to trial last week, should continue (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TEC_APPLE_IPOD_TRIAL?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-12-08-20-28-28) even after that last remaining plaintiff was disqualified. The lawsuit, which alleges that the company violated federal antitrust laws as well as California's unfair competition law, covers iPods purchased between September 12, 2006 and March 31, 2009.
Yesterday, US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers disqualified plaintiff Marianna Rosen after learning that she didn't purchase the device within the period cited in the lawsuit. Two other plaintiffs had earlier withdrawn as their iPods were not covered by the lawsuit.
However, Rogers also rejected Apple's appeal to dismiss the case, saying that she has an "an affirmative obligation and a duty" to protect the estimated 8 million iPod customers included in the class, and ordered the plaintiffs’ attorneys to identify new plaintiffs by today. The Cupertino-based company had argued that it's too late to name a new plaintiff now.
Filed back in 2005, the lawsuit accuses Apple of not allowing music purchased on the iTunes Music Store from being played on devices other than iPods, and not allowing iPods to play music purchased from other digital music services. Last week, the court was informed that the iPhone maker also deleted songs (http://www.techspot.com/news/59062-ipod-lawsuit-apple-deleted-songs-downloaded-rival-music.html) that iPod users had downloaded from rival music services during the period cited in the lawsuit.



Noticia completa:
http://www.techspot.com/news/59105-ipod-lawsuit-judge-orders-attorneys-suing-apple-find.html

[Jorge-Vieira]

Jury rules in Apple’s favor during iPod DRM anti-trust case (http://www.kitguru.net/apple/matthew-wilson/jury-rules-in-apples-favor-during-ipod-drm-anti-trust-case/)


An eight person jury has let Apple off the hook in the iPod DRM class action lawsuit trial. The lawsuit aimed to force Apple to compensate those who bought specific iPods between 2006 and March 2009 after it was found that Apple was anti-competitively blocking and removing songs that were paid for on rival music services.
The lawsuit could have ended up costing the company as much as $1 billion. Delivering the verdict today, the jury decided that Apple’s iTunes 7.0 update was a “genuine product improvement”, siding with the claim that Apple blocked rival services from iPods in an effort to bolster device security.
http://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/l_030333491.jpg (http://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/l_030333491.jpg)
This decision means that Apple did not violate any anti-trust laws, which could have led to the company paying up to $1 billion, despite the suit only asking for $350 million. The $350 million would have been used to pay back around eight million people who bought iPod models between September 2006 and March 2009.
According to the plaintiff’s attorney, an appeal is already planned so there is still a slim chance that the ruling could be over-turned but for now, it looks like Apple is out of the woods on this one.



Noticia:
http://www.kitguru.net/apple/matthew-wilson/jury-rules-in-apples-favor-during-ipod-drm-anti-trust-case/

[Jorge-Vieira]

This proposed iPod Classic design looks worthwhile


Remember when the iPod Classic was quietly assassinated and taken down from Apple's e-shelves late in 2014 (http://www.tweaktown.com/news/40158/apple-quietly-retires-ipod-classic/index.html)? We reported recently that these products are becoming somewhat of a collectors item, drumming up large prices through online mediums such as eBay (http://www.tweaktown.com/news/41740/apple-ipod-classic-now-becoming-expensive-collector-item/index.html) - seeing prices like $350 being commonplace for second-hand offerings.


http://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/news/4/2/42473_016_proposed-ipod-classic-design-looks-worthwhile.jpg (http://www.tweaktown.com/image.php?image=imagescdn.tweaktown.com/news/4/2/42473_016_proposed-ipod-classic-design-looks-worthwhile_full.jpg)

Designer Claudio Gomboli (http://theeggs.biz/) wants to bring the Classic back to reality, releasing a nifty new concept design. As we've discovered, this design is purely just a concept, with no current means for funding or implementation into the market - but it's certainly not out of the equation for this to happen in the future.

Thanks to the click-wheel making long song list scrolling an easy task, this design is basically a simple cover for an existing iPhone or iPod touch. This means that if Gomboli is to make this as a 3rd-party add on for existing products, expect Apple to not play nice. However if you're already running or are planning to run a jail-broken phone, you should have no issues.

Either way this is a pretty cool concept and design, here's hoping it hits Kickstarter in the near future.




Noticia:
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/42473/proposed-ipod-classic-design-looks-worthwhile/index.html