Lance Ulanoff Takes A Critical Look at The Apple Announcement

By Wednesday September 9, 2009

Ulanoff, I’m sure of it, could pass for Steve Jobs if he’d wear jeans.



24 Comments
  1. deowll says:
    9/9/2009 at 10:06 pm

    Apple= ZZZZZZzzzzzzz

    Reply
  2. Chris Mac says:
    9/9/2009 at 10:52 pm

    This should be good. Like McCains in the microwave.

    Reply
  3. Mackie says:
    9/9/2009 at 11:28 pm

    1. Steve still looks pretty skinny to me. Big props for coming back 7 months after a liver transplant, but he looks far from good.

    2. no camera on the ipod touch? yikes!

    3. camera but not pictures on the nano? huh??

    4. Why is the classic still around? this should have been phased out – seems like a waste of resources to market it. Might as well make a fatboy iPhone that has the extra storage..

    pretty much a yawn announcement and the small drop in stock price is a reflection of the market’s take on the event: Boring… so now we shall wait for the Zune announcement.

    Reply
  4. mr. show says:
    9/9/2009 at 11:48 pm

    My take on the lack of the video camera on the itouch was so as not to cannibalize sales of the new iPhone from AT&T (as the iTouch can do Skype calls).

    I keep hearing about “chip problems” (which I think is bull) with incorporating the camera into the touch but wouldn’t the new iTouch be a new 3G iPhone without the telephony?

    Reply
  5. jobs says:
    9/10/2009 at 12:06 am

    #3 Even though the classic sells less then the other iods it still outsells any other hard drive player on the market.

    Reply
  6. JoaoPT says:
    9/10/2009 at 1:06 am

    New iPods… Yaaawwwnn….

    Seriously, I was thinking all the line, except the nano, would move to ipod touch, the classic would be replaced by a touch with HardDrive, and they would ditch the shuffle.
    IMHO the nano is the best all around iPod. Seriously, who needs 160Gb…people already have all the stuff on the desktop and on the laptop…

    Reply
  7. DrunkenChainSmokerLook says:
    9/10/2009 at 1:27 am

    John, someone who looks like…

    …a shorter-hair version of Aileen Wuornos (Charlize Theron played the Floridian murderess in “Murder”)…

    …shouldn’t talk.

    Reply
  8. pedro says:
    9/10/2009 at 2:04 am

    No wonder PCMag has turned into macMag! I didn’t know Ulanoff was such a macfan.

    It was nice to see macfans get their panties wet though.

    Reply
  9. Cursor_ says:
    9/10/2009 at 2:24 am

    Pale, thin, pallid and gaunt.

    And Jobs didn’t look very well either.

    Cursor_

    Reply
  10. Somebody_Else says:
    9/10/2009 at 2:32 am

    I guess Leo was right on Twit. They brought Jobs to a crappy announcement so his return wouldn’t overwhelm anything of importance.

    The new Nano sounds pretty dumb.

    Reply
  11. Rider says:
    9/10/2009 at 2:35 am

    @3

    Why is the classic still around, the real question is why would anyone buy an mp3 player that only holds 16gb, oh and you get to pay the wonderfully low price of 179$ for such a useless device.

    I want an mp3 player, not some tiny media device that takes pictures, plays games and has no space to hold any of it.

    Reply
  12. Father Tomb says:
    9/10/2009 at 5:13 am

    Why not an iphone with an HD and a big battery?

    Are we beyond the ipod phase yet? How many devices do you carry around?

    Reply
  13. cornholer says:
    9/10/2009 at 6:00 am

    Apple: What the Fuck? Worst episode ever!

    Reply
  14. chuck says:
    9/10/2009 at 6:54 am

    Apple kinda blew it by putting the camera in the Nano, but not in the Touch.

    The odd thing is, I didn’t really think about having a camera in an iPod (ignoring the iPhone) until they stuck it in the Nano. Now I want a Touch with a camera in it.

    I have 49GB of music, so I need the 64GB Touch, which would have left room for video. But with no camera, I guess I’ll be waiting for next year’s announcement.

    Reply
  15. Ron Larson says:
    9/10/2009 at 7:19 am

    Dumb question….
    Does the iPod Nano video camera also record audio? Seems a bit pointless to shoot video without the audio to go with with it. A camera would have made more sense.

    Reply
  16. smaki611 says:
    9/10/2009 at 7:51 am

    ok, so my thoughts are as follows

    1) larger Ipod classic. Perfect for automobiles. I have a pioneer deck in my car, and I leave my current classic loaded with music and videos. Being able to have my whole library of both, is nice.

    2) ipod Nano — Interesting, but underwhelming. I honestly think that they are only looking at competing with the flip, but that is it. The FM tuner doesn’t make sense, if it was HD, it would be better.

    3) iPod Touch. Love the new size option, hate the fact that it doesn’t have a camera yet.

    Reply
  17. Awake says:
    9/10/2009 at 8:13 am

    Nothing to announce, so they announce Steve Jobs is feeling better, and the crowd goes wild!

    Snow Leopard = Service Pack 2 = Yawn
    Variations on music players = Yawn
    An even more bloated iTunes = Ughhh
    Ringtomes… more rigntones = Pfffttt
    75000 apps = 10 useful apps = $1400 / year phone service

    And you think Obama has a “cult of personality” following? HA!

    Reply
  18. zorkor says:
    9/10/2009 at 8:49 am

    #17

    couldn’t have put it better myself. :)

    Reply
  19. Buzz says:
    9/10/2009 at 8:49 am

    Apple will sell a cubic kilometer of the videoNanos. Next year they will sell a cubic mile of the HDvideoNanos with 32/64/128 GB chips.

    Also coming: the iPhoneChat. A two-way iPhone to iPhone only video phone system.

    The coming tablet will kill Kindle.

    Buzz mega zchemega shevva.

    Reply
  20. Rider says:
    9/10/2009 at 1:19 pm

    @16

    Actually it’s not really a bigger iPOD classic it’s the same size as the one they stopped making last year.

    Reply

Newer Comments »

Leave a Response


Bad Behavior has blocked 25718 access attempts in the last 7 days.