Enter the Canon Rebel XSi. This is my new toy. I’ve only had it for a couple of hours and already I have taken a few hundred shots. Naturally the first few photos were of my fiancee and her ring. I’ll upload more photos as they trickle in. Here are today’s winners:

Naturally, I found myself at the Apple Store looking for a Nano replacement. I knew my screen could not be fixed, but the lady wanted to ask, so she inquired to see if the screen could be fixed. As expected, she was informed that the screen could not be fixed easily or cheaply. What I did not expect however, was to find out that I could get a 10% discount on a new iPod if I gave them my broken one. According to the Apple guy, with Apple’s Replacement Program, you can get a 10% discount on new iPods by giving them your old iPod. That is a good deal, and I am a fan.

So what is the moral (or point) of this post? To let you know that if you have an old iPod lying around, or if you are due for an upgrade, make sure you get your 10% discount when purchasing an new one. Me? I walked out of the store with a new silver Nano and transparent hard case in my coat pocket and a lot less money in my bank account. Grrr.

Now before I really get into why I think that, let me say that I am aware that the point of the device is to combine the iPod and cell phone. I get that. And I think it is generally a smart move. I just think Apple did it badly. OK, now lets get into it what is wrong with this device.

[So what's included in the package?]
The first problem I have with the iPhone is its ‘includes.’ What this means is that when you purchase the device it includes a phone, includes an iPod, and my personal favorite, includes service with Cingular (this may change in the future, but they said multi-year agreement…). These are all non-negotiable items that you get when you purchase the device whether you want them or not. So if you want just a wide-screen touch sensitive iPod, or if you just want an ultra-portable Macintosh computer, sorry, you’re out of luck. You get them all. Take it or leave it.

Now I know there are people out there that want an iPhone. I know this. However, I truly believe there are more people out there who want the device sans-phone. This could be because they are locked into a different carrier but want a new iPod, or perhaps because they want to use their iPod to watch movies on a long flight (you have to turn cell phones off on airplanes remember). I know personally both of the above are true which leaves me with little need/want for the phone portion of the device.

But phone/ipod ties aside, the worst inclusion of them all is Cingular. Because while tons of people love their iPods, I’m willing to bet that they hate cell phone providers even more. Every person I have ever met over the age of about 15 has a serious opinion about providers. They love provider X and despise provider Y, and very very few will ignore those opinions to gain access to a specific phone. Personally, I am of the like Sprint dislike Cingular camp. And as much as I would like an iPhone, I don’t see myself going back to Cingular anytime soon. And I simply dislike Cingular and refuse to switch. Imagine the people who hate Cingular.

So what we are left with is a very niche product. Not only does someone have to want an iPod and phone in one package, they also have to want (or be willing) to put up with Cingular.

[Now how much does this thing cost?]
The iPhone is not cheap. I wouldn’t say that the price is unreasonable, but it also is not cheap and will definitely play a major factor in the adoption rate of the iPhone, or the lack of adoption I believe. As it stands currently, you can get a 4GB iPhone for $499 or an 8GB for $599. Keep in mind that this INCLUDES (there goes those inclusions again) a 2-year contract with Cingular. There has been no price announced to purchase it without a 2-year contract, but if it is similar to typical cell phone deals, you can figure another $200 to buy the phone outright. That is expensive. Very expensive. Too expensive.

The price may not seem bad for some, but to most I think it will be. I know I personally have about $400 worth of electronics in my pocket right now (iPod Nano and LG Fusic), but the difference is that these items were purchased separately. I bought my 4GB iPod Nano ($250) and then some months later bought my LG Fusic ($150). And while the totals are close, the affects the two would have on my financial situation is not. Spending $250 today and $150 in six months is not as financially burdensome as spending $500 tomorrow. This is why I opted to pass on the Treo I really wanted for the LG Fusic that would get the job done.

But what about the fact that you get the iPod AND a phone together? Well, even then the numbers do not seem to add up to me. I can currently get a 4GB Nano for $200 (I’m using the Nano because of its size, not its features. Comparing the iPhone to a $300 video iPod makes the iPhone seem even worse due to the huge difference in capacity), which means I would be spending $300 for just the phone component. That is an expensive phone. And unfortunately for Apple, most people do not have expensive phones. In fact, the only expensive phones I see people with are the ones their company purchased for them. And I know that this phone also includes an OS and other goodies, but really that just won’t matter.

Smart phones, albeit expensive and a touch difficult to use for some, do not sell in big numbers. Why? The cost and the features. Sure, people would like to have extras (calendar, Internet, IM, etc.), but nobody really wants to pay for them. Consider the RAZR. Everyone wanted a slim design phone when it first arrived on the market, but it only started selling once it came down to the $150 price range. Another example is the Treo. It’s a great device that works well, but does not sell in huge numbers due to its price point.

Lastly, you have to consider the cost of Internet access for the phone. And currently, Cingular is charging ~$40/month for unlimited access. That is on top of the normal voice plans. That is expensive. Especially when Sprint is offering unlimited access for less than half that ($15/month). I know this was one of my deciding factors in choosing to drop Cingular as my carrier. And while Cingular’s charges are not necessarily a fault of the phone, the phone is only available on Cingular, so it has to be taken into consideration.

[Who exactly are they marketing this device too?]
If you read the numbers, or walk into an iPod store, the iPods market is predominately people between 12 and 28: teens, college kids, and first generation business folks. This sounds like a huge market, and it is, which is why the iPod has done so well. Unfortunately for Apple, if you look at each segment of the market individually the iPhone is not marketed very well to any of them. In fact, it almost alienates the majority of the typical iPod / cellphone demographic.

Teens: Apple has a lose-lose problem with the teen market. First, most teens do not have cell phone plans of their own. They are bundled with their parent’s plans. Therefore, they get whatever service their parents get. Therefore, having the phone be Cingular exclusive is going to be a problem for the teen demographic unless their parents already have Cingular service. Secondly, parents are not likely to buy their teenage kid a $500 cell phone.

College: The cost of this device is going to be a huge hurdle for the college crowd. Typically, college kids live life on a very tight budget, and while you can visit almost any campus and see kids walking around with iPods, I challenge you to find a handful of college kids walking around with valuable phones (Blackberry’s, Treo’s, etc.). It’s not going to happen. Yes college kids go for style, yes they go for cool, but more than anything they go for price. And $500 out of a students financial aid reimbursement check for the quarter is NOT going to sit well with them.

Business: This has to be Apple’s ideal market because here you have a good amount of middle-aged can’t quite let go of being cool individuals with expendable income (umm, yeah, I guess you could include me in this category minus that last detail). Therefore, this is the demographic most likely to pay premiums for a ‘cool’ device. So what is the problem? The problem for Apple will be that this is also the group likely to have the most definitive opinions about providers. They know who they like, they know who they do not like, and they are willing to pay more to get the service they feel they deserve. So if that individual prefers Verizon, they will stay with Verizon, and purchase a Motorola iAlmost instead of jumping ship or wait until Apple releases the iPhone on Verizon’s network.

[And all of this means...]
In closing, what this means is that while the iPhone is an impressive device, it is unfortunately an extremely niche product that will enjoy an exceptionally slow adoption rate. So while it will be talked about heavily and make other manufacturers rethink their future releases, it won’t be nearly as successful (and thus revolutionary) as the iPod or the mouse (Apple’s other revolutionary products according to Steve). The other two products enjoyed success because they solved problems such as an individuals need to easily navigate a computer or need to transport/listen to tons of music easily, without adding many hurdles. The iPhone however, throws several hurdles in front of its attempts at solving people’s need to combine their phone/music player into one product.

However, what did surprise me was how CNN (yeah, you know that worldwide news channel) blasted the Zune. Seriously. The video is just painful. I love how they keep asking if it does this and that, only to be told “no.”

Personally I have a few problems with the player. Mainly that it 1) does not work on Macintosh machines and 2) uses some crazy point system to purchase songs.

Anyway, check out the video. It is definitely entertaining.

[Video Link]

From the moment it was announced people started claiming Microsoft’s new service to be the “Apple-Killer” and pointing out how Apple must be frustrated since Microsoft beat them to the living room. Others simply focused on the technical superiority of the Xbox’s HD content compared to Apple’s almost as good as DVD resolution. However, I think people are wishful thinking and creating a false rivalry. Yes it is true that they both will allow an individual to watch downloaded content on their TV, but just because two devices share the same end result does not necessarily mean they are in competition with one another. In fact, I would say that one word will keep these two services from competing with one another: portability.

Apple sells its movies and television shows to customers because people want to enjoy their media on-the-go. Instead of sitting shotgun on a road trip and sleeping, sitting uncomfortably on an airplane staring at a tray table, or watching fellow commuters on the local mass-transit at 6am with a skeptical eye, they want to watch an episode of 24, Prison Break, BattleStar Galactica, etc. This is why people buy movies/television shows from iTunes. Nobody purchases television series from iTunes with the intention of watching it on their TV. I know that sounds odd, but it is the truth. Sure, being able to watch their favorite episode of the Chapelle Show on their glorious 42″ HDTV when at home would be a nice perk, but that option is just that, a perk. Apple understands this, recognizes that its users love perks, and therefore is releasing the iTV to allow people to watch their portable content at home easily. I know many people want it to be more, but that is it. They are simply looking to make portable content easily enjoyable at home.

Microsoft on the other hand is attempting to deliver content to your home, and only your home. All of the content downloaded from Xbox Live Marketplace will be stored on your Xbox. And since nobody is going to be packing around their Xbox, a television, and a hefty battery pack to watch content on the go, Microsoft’s offering has no portability. None. It is at the home content only. That is why I do not see the two competing with one another for customers. Apple is occupying the spare time of the on-the-go individual, while Microsoft is trying to satisfy the HD cravings of the almighty couch potato. They are two separate customers, with two separate needs, and the companies solutions illustrate this.

So if Microsoft is not competing with Apple, the question is who is Microsoft competing against? Cable/satellite providers. Microsoft wants to offer its users the ability to purchase HD television shows, or rent HD movies, so they can watch them at their convenience. And while this “sounds” new and exciting, it is nothing but the same old offering in new packaging. Companies such as Comcast have been, and currently do, provide its customers the exact same functionality (minus the purchasing of television shows) and convenience that Microsoft is attempting to provide with its upcoming service.

As an example, with the click of an “on demand” button on my remote, I have the option of renting (for a 24hr window just like the Xbox service) any movie of my choice in glorious HD. Or, I could pay Comcast $10 more a month, get DVR functionality, and record all of the television shows I want. This allows me to enjoy the content I want, when I want, just like the Xbox Live service. And just like the Xbox service, the content cannot be easily transported or enjoyed outside of my living room. I am trapped to the confines of my living quarters. This offering is drastically different from the Apple option which allows me to be entertained not only when I want, but where I want.

So in closing, while the Microsoft vs. Apple war is always an interesting one to watch, it looks like we will have to wait a while longer before we get to really see the two battle it out for the living room. For now though, congrats to Apple for offering users the easiest way to enjoy their favorite past-time while in transit or at home. And congrats to Microsoft for being able to repackage an old offering and convince people its new.

Do those numbers surprise you?

[Article Link]

Now usually this is not something I would write about, but I find this particular upgrade conversation interesting. For example, the conversation on when the new processors would be included has got hyped up so much that many people have held off purchasing a new Macbook (I almost did the same) until the new processors are included. They want the new processor and they want the 20% increase. However, is the wait really worth it?

The short answer: No.

The long answer: To answer this question (which I asked myself a few weeks ago), I looked at my computer purchasing pattern. After looking at the date (below), I noticed that I typically buy a new computer every two and half years. In addition, with each purchase I typically receive an increase in performance of more than double (100% increase) what I currently have.

So given those results, I had to ask myself if waiting for the “claimed” 20% increase in speed really was worth waiting around for? As stated, it was/is not.

On one side of the coin, one would say that it is. By looking at the graph, it is apparent that over time the percentage of performance increase per purchase has decreased. Therefore, waiting for an additional 20% could be justified. However, given that my upgrades are for more than double the performance, an additional 20% seems like nothing and most likely would not be noticeable while performing day to day tasks.

Another factor to take into consideration with the above numbers is that most people do not upgrade their systems as often as I do. In fact, I think the average upgrade cycle is more in the five or six year range (I think I read that somewhere at one point in time), so when most people are upgrading they are already seeing performance gains closer to 500%. And really, how noticeable is a 520% increase compared to a 500% increase? Not much.

So the point of this article: stop holding out and upgrade. While holding out for the latest and greatest is a pleasure we all love, it is one that leaves you perpetually unsatisfied. In addition, taking into consideration that the performance increase is only a “claim”, that most users are already seeing performance gains of more than 100%, and that the extra 20% is not likely to give your computer an extra year or two of life, holding out for an additional 20% seems .. well .. ridiculous?

Now unlike some, I did not switch because I think Apple makes the best OS or because I am a huge fan of theirs (although they have been growing on me lately). I switched predominately because I am unhappy with Microsoft and where they are taking the Windows platform, and partly because I was curious.

Anyways, now it is time for my rant on why I gave up using Windows…

/Begin Rant

I like Windows, and think overall it is a good Operating System that with the correct adjustments is a rather secure system to live with. As an example, I have used it since its 3.11 (pre-Start menu) days and in that time I have gotten a virus a total of two times. One of which was caused by me running some executable I should not have been running, and the other caused by some bad code at Microsoft (it was the Blaster Worm to be precise). Now given that track record, I would argue that Windows is relatively secure. Granted, I disable a number of system services (secondary logon, remote registry, etc.), do not use an administrator account for normal usage, and stay away from Internet Explorer (IE), so my situation differs from the standard. However, I would still say that Windows is secure enough, and therefore, security was not what drove me away; it was usability.

My first point of aggravation with Windows started with MSN Messenger (I think it was version 6) when Microsoft started stealing my http clicks and opening them in Internet Explorer. As stated, I do not have IE set as my default browser and therefore do not want web pages opening in IE. However, whenever I click a URL in MSN Messenger, it opens it in Internet Explorer. I find this to be a ridiculous and monopolistic practice as there is no logical reason for forcing URLs to open in IE. None!

The second strike came with system requirements. It bothers me slightly that I need to have an insanely powerful computer to run the latest and greatest version of Windows. I can understand the need for bleeding edge technology when you want to play video games, do graphic design, or produce music, but not to simply run the computer. It just does not make sense. And yes, I know XP will run on some older systems, but have you tried using it on those systems? It is painful. As an example, it takes nearly double the horsepower to run an XP system as it did a 2K system and it looks like Vista will require nearly double of what XP requires. Why? Again, I am not talking about the minimum system requirements, but the specs needed to actually have an enjoyable experience.

The third and final strike involves none other than Microsoft’s Windows Genuine Activation (WGA) toolkit. I hate this thing; a lot. I can understand initially having a product phone home to activate, and I actually thought the initial idea was a good one. However, the newer renditions of WGA seem to be released more often (almost monthly?) and seem to phone home more often, and over smaller items, than before. It is a skeptical practice, and one that I cannot endorse. I do not need too, nor want to, nor am I going to, phone in to Microsoft every time I make the slightest change to my system.

As an example, the other day I removed my secondary hard drive from my computer because I wanted to move it to an external USB enclosure so it did not have to be powered on all the time. When I turned on my computer after removing the hard drive, XP Professional quickly informed me that changes had been made to the system and I had three (3) days to activate or XP would become unusable. Are you serious? I have to phone-home and inform Microsoft that I removed a hard drive? No thanks, I’d rather not. It makes me wonder though, are services like these causing the ever-increasing minimum specifications to use Windows? If so, what a waste of resources…

Anyway, I can understand changing items such as the CPU or the motherboard causing WGA to require re-authentication, but things such as DVD drives, hard drives, and RAM are items that even the most novice of individuals can and will swap out from time to time. Not to mention these are probably the most frequently changed parts in a computer, so I see no good reason for those types of changes to require Windows to be re-activated.

/End Rant

So in the end, it is adios Windows and hello OS X.

Anyway, here are my initial impressions of the machine.

[GOOD]
Graphics: They are not astronomically better than the original Xbox, but definitely a noticeable improvement. Then again, I am not using a HDTV (although this machine may just convince me to buy one), so my graphics are scaled down significantly.

Demos: This is by far my favorite part of the 360. In the first day, I think I downloaded about 10 demos. And, the demos download in the background so you can play one game while another one downloads. I like it.

Arcade: The arcade section provides access to older games (Street Fighter II, anyone?) that you can download and play on the 360. The 360 also comes pre-loaded with the arcade title Hexic HD, which, is a good time waster. Nice.

Music: When you plug your iPod into the 360 it will recognize all of your music and playlists. This is a great feature and almost justifies the purchase of the system (for me). In addition, the 360 will charge your iPod while it is plugged up. You can also have the 360 pull music from your computer, and it does this almost flawlessly.

Video: You cannot play any video other than WMV and you have to be running Window Media Center. In short, this means that I will not be using this feature in the foreseeable future.

Xbox Live: With the purchase, I got a one month free Gold Membership. This is a smart move by Microsoft. I would never have purchased a membership but after playing around with the Gold Membership for just a few days, I am already considering purchasing a year long subscription. There is something about playing against people across the planet that is just oh so satisfying. And, for those who are in to the arcade titles, they are Xbox Live compatible also.

[BAD]
Music: I really only have two complaints when it comes to the music and both of them are rather small. The first is that the 360 will not recognize iTunes shares. This makes no sense to me. If it can recognize iPod songs and playlists, then I know it can recognize iTunes shares, songs, and playlists. This is a non-issue for me as I just plug my iPod into the machine, but it just annoys me. And yes, I understand Microsoft’s position as they want people to use Windows, but that does not mean I have to like it.

Second, the control scheme on the 360 is not friendly for larger music collections. You can sort by genre, song, artist, album or playlist, but you can only sort by one at a time. So if you have a collection of, oh, 1,000 artists, finding someone whose name starts with an M can be quite time consuming. But again, this is a non-issue for me as I only keep about 500 on my iPod at any given time anyway.

Noise: The 360 is loud. If you have your TV on a normal to low volume level, and have your 360 sitting out in the open, chances are you can hear the 360 in the background. To eliminate some of the noise, I had to place mine inside of the TV stand and keep the door shut which is not a good thing because the machine gets pretty toasty.

Price: Not the price of the system, but the price of the games. I actually think the price of the system is reasonable, albeit a bit high, for what you get. However, having 360 games cost $10 more than their Xbox, Gamecube, or PS2 counterparts even though the game is the exact same, is simply absurd. Thank goodness for online gems such as Gameznflix.com.

Well that is it. I just had to chime in real quick and let everyone know my good news. But now, it is time for me to get back on the sticks and go KO someone in Fight Night 3. If you got game, look me up online. Adios.

I did not want to switch, as I am a huge fan of the rollover minutes, but the dropped calls was simply killing me. I know Cingular is the carrier with the fewest dropped calls (or so their commercials say), but that statement simply did not apply to me. I would say, conservativly, about 40% of all of my phone calls dropped. Usually between the 15 and 45 minute mark. It was frustrating. And before you ask, I tried different phones (all Motorola’s ironically enough), and my calls were still dropped all the time.

So, to alleviate the problem (hopefully), I switched to Sprint. I have heard some bad things about Sprint in the past, but I figured they were the lesser of the two three evils (Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon), so I went with them. Actually, I think Verizon is the lesser of the three, but also the most expensive, so Sprint won. I should be posting some thoughts on Sprint and my already returned Samsung A900 and newly acquired LG Fusic in the near future (maybe).

What carrier do you currently use?

So what do I use the PSP for then? Browsing the web. There was a short stint of time where I got involved with converting videos and putting them on the PSP to watch, but that did not last long. It was nice and convenient on the plane ride to Miami, but other than that, I just cannot see where or why I would want to watch shows on a PSP.

Anyway, back to the machines primary use; web browsing. It is absolutely frustrating. I would estimate that roughly 70% of the websites I visit result in nothing more than a “not enough memory” error. No text, no graphics, no web. It is horrible.

I have tried several fixes. Everything from maximizing the cache, to having no cache at all, to deleting all the PSP files, to formatting the memory stick, to buying a bigger memory stick, but in the end, eventually my “not enough memory” error will resurface to bring my web browsing to a halt. I simply cannot get rid of it.

The most frustrating part of it all though, is that it is not consistent. Sometimes I can browse for hours with no problems on memory munching sites such as Flickr or Myspace. And other times I cannot even visit text only version of BBC News. There just seems to be no rhyme or reason to it all. It is so frustrating I am actually considering selling the device and buying myself an alternate device (PDA, Blackberry, Treo, etc.).

Anyone know of a way to fix it?

So why did I buy it? Because it is a gadget and I like gadgets (mostly). In addition, I have been in the market for a handheld device that can access the internet via Wi-Fi. I have looked at phones, laptops, and an assortment of PDA devices. And in the end, the PSP does it the best (for the cost that is). I was able to get online both at home and at school with minimal effort (WoooHooo).

My other reason is I am going on vacation, and I figure I might want to watch a movie or two, play some video games, the web, or some pictures from time to time while in sunny Miami, FL. This little device will hopefully assist me with all that (hopefully hopefully).

Now maybe I will go browse the web and see what type of “home-brew” apps are available for this little machine.

To be perfectly clear, the Microsoft and Sony strategies are based on overall corporate objectives versus what’s right for the consumer. That’s a reality. Microsoft is essentially trying to get you to put a PC in your living room because they are fundamentally a PC software company. Sony is trying to get you to put an entertainment hub that has Blu-ray technology because that’s important to their movie business and the rest of their entire electronics business.

We are a gaming company. We are gamers at heart. We love creating great, innovative content and superbly designed hardware, that’s what we do. And with that passion comes a laser like focus to do things that are right for the consumer and right for the business. That’s the fundamental difference in our strategy versus our competition.

I could not agree with him more. That is one, if not the main reason, why I have no plans on purchasing a next generation console until I get some hands-on experience with the new Nintendo. Except for the GameCube, Nintendo has never let me down in any of their offerings, so I feel compelled (and excited) to give them a chance this time.

If that is not reason enough, I also have a negative need for anything media-like in my living room as all of my current media desires (and then some) are fulfilled by my modded first generation Xbox. That thing is absolutely amazing.

As I updated my iPod with new songs and deleted the old ones, I noticed the album art problem slowly but surely getting worse and worse. It got so bad that the artwork it showed in the “Now Playing” screen would not even match the artwork it displayed when viewing the artwork Full Screen. Huh? How is it possible that the iPod was looking in two completely different places for artwork. It made/makes no sense.

Well, being a Windows user, my first plan of action (idea) was to go ahead and format the drive, wipe it clean, and start over. Well, thank goodness when it comes to my pricey piece of fun I play on the cautious side, as Apple clearly states that doing such an action is a bad idea. A very bad idea.

Do not use a disk utility program, such as Disk Utility, Drive Setup, or Windows Explorer, to erase iPod. Erasing songs from iPod this way can disable its music playing capabilities and you may have to update or restore iPod to get it to work again.

Whew! I got lucky with that one. I would have had to smack myself if I disabled the “music playing capabilities” of my Nano. So I am happy that I did not kill my little machine, but that did nothing to fix the problem with the displaying of incorrect album art.

Well, I researched, researched, and researched. And, after Googling, MSNing, and Yahooing, I came to the conclusion that I must be the first person ever to break their iPod in such a fashion. I could not find the slightest tidbit of information which listed ways in which I could get my iPod back to normal (well, I could do a restore, but I was hoping for something a little easier).

Then, by pure luck, I decided to open up iTunes and have a look around in the iPod Preferences pane. I noticed a check-mark which enabled or disabled album art on the Nano, and figured I would go ahead and give it a shot. Well, when you disable support, it does exactly what you would think. It makes it so that your iPod will not show any album art. So basically, it forces the Nano to display song information in the old center justified format (AKA ugly).

Thinking that I had conquered my troubles, I once again enabled album art. It took a few minutes for iTunes to optimize the album art for the Nano, and when it finished it quickly transferred over all of the artwork. And, surprisingly, it worked! Wooohooo. My Nano is now back to its original greatness and displaying the correct album art (both in Now Playing and in Full Screen). Sweet. I am happy.

Oh, for those wondering, I think I managed to break it by enabling “disk use” and disconnecting the iPod without actually hitting the eject button in iTunes or disconnecting the device through Explorer. I know I should not do that, but sometimes you are just in too much of a rush to actually go through all of the necessary steps. It is just easier to pull the plug on the device.

Update (12/07/05): Since this seems to be such a big problem, and to make life easier for everyone, I have created some simple steps for you to follow to get your iPod Nano (or Video) to display the correct album art.

Edit: Old steps removed. Please see update.

Update (10/14/06): Some people in the comments section have reported problem using the above methods in iTunes 7, while others have had great success using the above methods within iTunes 7 (please note that in iTunes 7 the iPod options are NOT located under edit -> preferences). I have tried looking into it but have been unable to get my iPod to have the same problem. Therefore, the above fix may or may not fix your specific issue. Either way, please post a comment, your version of iTunes, and any steps you had to perform differently, so that others can benefit also. Thank you.

Update (05/06/08): The steps have changed slightly for iTunes 7.x. Thanks to everyone in the comments that pointed this out.

Update (12/24/08): I’d like to say THANK YOU to everyone who has given this post praise in the comments below. I definitely appreciate it.

Follow these 8 simple steps.
1. Plug you iPod into your computer and open iTunes.
2. In iTunes, goto iPod -> Music
3. Deselect “Display album artwork on your iPod” -> click apply.
4. Your iPod will update. So wait (should take a few seconds).
5. Repeat step “2″
6. Select “Display album artwork on your iPod” -> click apply.
7. Your iPod will update. So wait (may take a minute or two).
8. Tada! Your iPod / iPhone should be back to its original greatness.
– - – - – - – - – - -
9. Add this podcast to your iTunes collection and enjoy (Shameless plug. I apologize.).

Well, no more than a few weeks later, Apple has gone ahead and announced a new version of their iPods that can play video. The base model comes with 30GB of storage and a price-tag of $300. I know, I know, $300 sounds like a lot of money, but when compared to the $250 I just spent on a 4GB model, the price really is not that bad. In addition, the ability to play video would be a nice, albeit useless, addition.

Why would it be useless? Well, the new iPods, on a full charge will be able to playback ‘about’ two hours of video. Sure that is one movie, but that really is not enough to keep anyone satisfied. Add that to the fact that it comes with the standard 2.5 inch screen, and I just cannot imagine wanting to stare at my screen for that long.

So, in the end, while this is a really nice addition to the iPod line-up, it is one that I probably would not venture into. I can see the benefits of having videos (music, personal, or otherwise) in your pocket, but seeing as how I do not even use the photo capabilities of my iPod with any consistency, I think this feature would be used even less.

However, as you know I mentioned earlier about the danger of the faulty screens. Well, Apple announced that they will fix the broken screens (good job Apple), so that eased some of my concerns. However, that did nothing for my concern of how easily the Nano’s scratch. And yes, they do scratch easily…very easily. I set mine on my desk (gently), and within a few minutes of minor movement it had some small scratches on the back of it. Unlike some other folks though, I am not angry about it at all. One look at the iPod Nano and you should KNOW it is going to scratch. I mean, after all, it has a glass-like surface that is just BEGGING to be scratched.

So, to solve my little problem, I just left the Nano in the plastic case it came with. It is sort of inconvenient as I have to take it out of the case whenever I need to charge it or transfer songs to it, but it is a small price to pay to keep my little machine looking halfway decent. Plus, it is only a temporary fix until I get my hands on a real iPod Nano case. So why haven’t I bought a case yet? Well, the things are on an extreme backorder and nobody in town has any for sale .

Oh well, I am more than happy to use my little plastic case for the time being. Go Nano!

I guess in some fashion it is a good thing that I came across this information when I did, as now I know to be gentle with the little machine and to buy a protective (hard-one) case no more than minutes after pulling it out of the package. Having to buy a case is unfortunate though, as I like the cool sleek look of the itty-bitty machine. I will keep you folks informed of the iPod Nano status.

Naturally, I have to compare the Yahoo! attempt to Apple’s
iTunes and Microsoft’s Windows Media Player (WMP). I have to compare the three
because WMP is on every Windows machine right now, and because iTunes, in my
opinion, is the best damn music player available (for free) at the moment.
Also, I know these are the two programs which Yahoo! is going to be targeting
as their main competition, so it is only fair to see how the three stack up
against one another.

Oh, and before I continue, just to let everyone know, iTunes
is a FREE program. You DO NOT have to buy songs from the iTunes Music Store to
use the program. It will play all of the mp3s you have on your computer without
ever having to purchase anything from Apple. 

[LIKES]

• Being
  able to rate songs on the radio and have them appear more often is an
  incredibly nice feature. Very similar to the approach WMP took, but
  implemented much better.
• The ability
  to rate the artist/album as well as the song is an incredibly nice feature
  as well, and one I have been waiting to see for quite some time.
• It automatically
  scans folders for changes to your music collection. This is one feature
  that iTunes is missing. I hate having to manually re-add the folder so it
  will notice the changes. 

[DISLIKES]

• Currently
  does not support embedded artwork. I am sure this will be fixed in the
  future, but currently, it does not support it.
• Does
  not play Yahoo! music videos. I thought this would definitely be an
  included feature that would give Yahoo! Music Engine an edge. They already
  have the groundwork laid with Launch, now all they need to do is tie it all
  together. I am incredibly disappointed this is not already included,
  especially since iTunes has easy access to music videos. I figured Yahoo!
  could one-up both iTunes and WMP.
• Requires
  Yahoo! Messenger to be installed. I understand they did this because
  Yahoo! Music Engine uses Yahoo! Messenger to share music, but I still hate
  the fact that they did it. For starters, I have enough IM clients. I do
  not want, or need, anymore. To add to that, I hate this bundling that
  everyone is doing lately. MS bundles IE with MSN7, AOL is bundling its own
  web browser with AIM, and now Yahoo! is bundling its Messenger with its
  new Music Engine. Grrrrr. STOP IT!! STOP IT!!! STOP IT!!!
• Design/Interface
  is built with iTunes in mind. This could be a good thing, but the Yahoo!
  interface is just simply not as good/intuitive/user friendly as the iTunes
  interface. You would think they would be able to improve upon what iTunes
  did, but nope. To me, this is an important (if not the most important) feature,
  as you can throw in an amazing amount of cool stuff into a piece of
  software, but if it is difficult to access/use, people (myself included)
  simply will not use them. Unfortunately for Yahoo!, it looks like this may
  be the case with Yahoo! Music Engine, as I can already see signs of areas
  (burning songs) which are just a tab bit too difficult.
• System
  resources. I used to think iTunes used up a lot of system resources, well,
  Yahoo! Music Engine uses up even more. And to make matters worse, you also
  have miscellaneous services using up resources and the Yahoo! Messenger
  client using up even more systems resources. Not good, not good at all, as
  I like my system to run as lean as possible.
• I
  cannot simply pinpoint this complaint to Yahoo! Music Engine, as it is
  across the board on all music players; import ratings. If Yahoo! can create
  this feature, allowing me with the push of a button to import the 1,000+
  ratings I already have in iTunes, I would be a very happy Yahoo! user.
• It
  uses Internet Explorer (IE). I hate this. Programs need to stop making their
  service depend on other programs, especially IE. I personally use Firefox,
  have it set as my default browser, and never open IE on my computer.
  Therefore, I get just a bit irritated when I click on a link within Yahoo!
  Music Engine and lo and behold, IE opens up. 

[CONCLUSION]

The player has a lot to offer, especially since it is only
in beta status at the moment. If you have no idea what beta means, it basically
means that the product is not ready for retail. And what that means is you can
expect more and better stuff to be included in the final package of Yahoo!
Music Engine.

However, at the moment, this player simply does not have
what it takes to take over iTunes spot as my music player of choice. It does
however have potential, a lot of potential, particularly in the area of its
internet radio features. I simply love the fact that a radio station can be
tailored to my tastes, especially since my tastes usually encompass genres
which are never played on any one given radio station (Common and System of A
Down anyone?).

The
headphones I have are those cheap over the top of your head old-school
pre-packaged with your average CD player type headphones. Nothing
special, but good enough to do their job, which is filter out some
background noise, and generate sound. Well, they still play sound, but
the plastic piece connecting the part that goes over your head to the
part that covers your ears is now broke.

I
am pretty sure it
happened the last time I stuck them in my backpack (the backpack is
another problem in itself). I guess I should have known better, but
regardless, it is still unfortunate. Now that things headphones are
broke though, they are amazingly uncomfortable. My left ear just is not
happy with the way the headphones straddle it anymore. Oh well, looks
like it is time to
start considering some new headphones. Maybe I will get some of those
earbud earphones with the plastic piece that goes over your ear to keep
them from falling out. Those things look convenient.