maybe now they can fix the gap in between tracks :)

The track gap thing is just insane! VERY annoying on so many recordings, but especially live ones.

If the gap is due to the chip set, then why does iTunes running on a Mac show the same problem?

Maybe the chip set is an extra problem. But since iTunes does not play-back without gaps, the issue is maybe not high enough on Apple's agenda.

Looks like yet another change due to Apple's partnering with intel. Makes sense for them to move to an intel chip - but the real question is what will the next generation 'upper end' of the iPod line be, and what additional features is a newer, better chip (I assume) needed for?

D'oh! It'll be the HandyCamPod.

Too late to sell my Portal Player stock?

If the gap is due to the chip set, then why does iTunes running on a Mac show the same problem?

iTunes, I believe, has some setting that controls this, such that you can basically say "no gap" if you want. iPods don't have this. Its forced upon you. And for some people, they find it really really really annoying, and, just so they aren't the only ones annoyed, they like recanting over and over again how really really really really annoying it is, espeically on live albums (like, is there proof the band and crowd didn't stop for a second to catch their breath???)

iTunes does not have a good "no gap" implementation. It allows you to rip an entire CD as a single track which eliminates gaps but does not allow you to seek to specific tracks. Alternately, iTunes can be configured for an "n" second crossfade but this is also not an acceptable solution for albums that already have segues between songs. There are very few players that handle this correctly. One combination that works is using the LAME MP3 encoder (which stores tags indicating the amount of silence added to the start and end of the MP3 file during encoding) combined with the Foobar2000 player (Windows only) that reads these tags and correctly plays the files back without gaps. In theory, Apple could write similar tags to MP3 (and AAC) files encodes with iTunes and solve the gap problem within iTunes.

For the iPod, the Portal Player DSP may not be powerful enough to handle the no-gap issue in this way. For a brief period of time it is necessary to decode two MP3 files simultaneously to eliminate the gap and this might go beyond the capabilities of the existing chips. (It may not be raw DSP speed but, for example, insufficient high speed SRAM on the chip to handle two audio streams.)

I find this issue with the iPod particularly annoying considering I own a first generation hard drive based MP3 player (developed in 1999!) that got the no-gap correct. I also find it annoying that the iPod will sometimes hiccup during playback of aggressive VBR MP3 files.

Maybe these issues will get resolved when the iPod moves to a faster DSP.

I hope whatever the replacement chipset is that it is lower cost with added benefits.

After having some time to think about this, I think Portal Player's share holders are getting screwed for no reason...

I think this doesn't so much points to their product not being used by Apple, as much as a possible shift in Apple's focus for the iPod line..

Apple won't be using the Portal Player chips in Flash based iPods...

So, what if the Shuffle is going bye-bye, and the nano is going to be the new low-end, and price reduced by using a cheeper chip-set (Intel?) That would leave the current iPod as a mid range (using Portal Player) and a possible new high-end iPod.. Portal Player only looses if that new high-end player doesn't utilize their chips...

Not saying this is 100% what's happening, but it makes more sense than the FUD/doom+gloom that's driven PPs shares down almost 50% today...

just my $0.02

jwd