Next-gen iPod nano, iPod touch dimensions revealed?

[AppleInsider]

Dimensional drawings said to depict Apple's next-generation digital media players suggest the company is about to unveil its thinnest iPod nano yet alongside a new version of the iPod touch that will be marginally thicker than its predecessor.

The drawings, published over at iLounge, show an iPod nano that will mark a return of the tall and narrow form factor, checking in at 0.75mm taller, 1.25mm narrower, and 0.42mm thinner than the second-generation iPod nanos introduced during the fall of 2006.

Although the drawings portray a more pronounced oval-shaped body than the second generation nanos, the player's aluminum enclosure will reportedly give way to a plastic covered screen that is flat, and doesn't share the same curvature as the iPod's body, as some earlier reports had suggested.

Meanwhile, the second-generation iPod touch is shown in the drawings to adopt several design cues from Apple's new iPhone 3G, including the use of a more tapered enclosure that will produce a thinning effect.

Compared to the existing iPod touch, the new model is said to be the same width, but 1mm taller and 0.4mm thicker. Also apparent from the drawings are the presence of physical volume controls on the side of the device (iPhone style), addressing one of the most widely cited shortcomings of the first-generation model.

Supposed drawings of next-gen iPods | Source : iLounge

While iLounge maintains that its drawings should be considered rumor and speculation, they largely correlate with existing reports of slim form factor nanos and slightly modified iPod touches.

Separately, iPod casemaker XSKN is now promoting fourth-generation iPod nano protectors (below) on its website that match the aforementioned description.

Apple is set to unveil its new iPod offerings at a special event next Tuesday in San Francisco.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[SpamSandwich]

Could be real, but then again it's not that difficult to fake a CAD drawing.

[bigmc6000]

People still use AutoCAD?!?!?! Those mockups are u-g-l-y and the drawing tools are pretty crappy. That really looks like AutoCAD from when I was in college!

[nofear1az]

So the iPod Touch is going to look just like an iPhone minus the phone features.... so original.... I wish they could keep the iPod Touch more unique to itself instead of matching the iPhone. Why not make it thinner and more square on the back.

I am not sure how you currently change the volume on a iPod Touch but wouldn't it be easy enough to adjust the volume right from the touch screen in any menu you are on or anywhere on the screen.... like maybe do a double tap on the screen and it comes up with a volume adjustment and you slide your fingers across. Just thinking out loud.

I think the new iPod Nanos are going to look real nice... I had another weird thought the other day. They should take the current phatt iPod Nanos and add a clip on the back of it just like the shuffle and turn it into a shuffle replacement.... that thing is already so small it be a perfect shuffle replacement with screen and yet small enough to jog with (if it had a clip).

[GQB]

Originally Posted by nofear1az

So the iPod Touch is going to look just like an iPhone minus the phone features.... so original.... I wish they could keep the iPod Touch more unique to itself instead of matching the iPhone. Why not make it thinner and more square on the back.

I am not sure how you currently change the volume on a iPod Touch but wouldn't it be easy enough to adjust the volume right from the touch screen in any menu you are on or anywhere on the screen.... like maybe do a double tap on the screen and it comes up with a volume adjustment and you slide your fingers across. Just thinking out loud.

I think the new iPod Nanos are going to look real nice... I had another weird thought the other day. They should take the current phatt iPod Nanos and add a clip on the back of it just like the shuffle and turn it into a shuffle replacement.... that thing is already so small it be a perfect shuffle replacement with screen and yet small enough to jog with (if it had a clip).

touch currently allows double-tap to get a volume, but that means you have to fireup the screen and look at the device. The need is for physical volume control to allow blind adjustment.

I think its funny that after all the moaning about the 'phatty' last year, people are now complaing about how the revival of the slim design looks like a Zune. People have no memories.

I personally think the original Nano design was the best of anything except the touch, and think the slightly stretched revival will be great. Too bad I don't need one.

[Porchland]

Bye bye, Fatty!

I never really liked the look of the scroll wheel sitting in all that white space.

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by nofear1az

So the iPod Touch is going to look just like an iPhone minus the phone features.... so original.... I wish they could keep the iPod Touch more unique to itself instead of matching the iPhone. Why not make it thinner and more square on the back....

Well it's certainly not going to be exactly the same, so your criticism is a bit off IMO.

Even a quick look at these drawings suggest a very *different* camera than the iPhone one (if that is a camera hole), perhaps with a flash? Also, there does not appear to be speaker holes on the bottom, and the earphone jack is still on the bottom not on the top like an iPhone.

[nofear1az]

Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2

Well it's certainly not going to be exactly the same, so your criticism is a bit off IMO.

Even a quick look at these drawings suggest a very *different* camera than the iPhone one (if that is a camera hole), perhaps with a flash? Also, there does not appear to be speaker holes on the bottom, and the earphone jack is still on the bottom not on the top like an iPhone.

very different huh, you can tell that by the CAD drawing... amazing... I don't see 'very different' in those drawings but hey, it could be just me.

[paxman]

The nano looks nice but there is a lot of wasted real-estate there. I hope the screen will be wider / longer. Well, if you are able to flip the thing on its side and use it in wide screen format, that is. I also think the big change for the iPod Touch will be the price. And all of them will get larger capacities.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by paxman

The nano looks nice but there is a lot of wasted real-estate there. I hope the screen will be wider / longer. Well, if you are able to flip the thing on its side and use it in wide screen format, that is.

It's already being shown to come over the beveled area. that means it's set in so the front isn't a smooth transtion from case to screen, or the screen jettisons over the sides.

I also think the big change for the iPod Touch will be the price.

I agree.

And all of them will get larger capacities.

I don't see how.

[brianb08]

Are the units here correct? Is it really mm or should it be cm. 0.42mm thinner... barely measurable!

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

The drawings, published over at iLounge, show an iPod nano that will mark a return of the tall and narrow form factor, checking in at 0.75mm taller, 1.25mm narrower, and 0.42mm thinner than the second-generation iPod nanos introduced during the fall of 2006.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[holywarrior007]

Although iPods and iPhones bring lots of revenues to Apple Inc. However it is not so good for Apple to focus on these things so much. Apple is known for computers, and of late they have given a low priorities to computers. It is really bad. They are not caring to be ahead of others in revamping the computers specifically. It is really funny to see that they are going to offer new iPods before new MacBooks. It is so stupid. Perhaps in future they would like to be known as a company which sells music players and cellphones, not computers.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by holywarrior007

Although iPods and iPhones bring lots of revenues to Apple Inc. However it is not so good for Apple to focus on these things so much. Apple is known for computers, and of late they have given a low priorities to computers. It is really bad. They are not caring to be ahead of others in revamping the computers specifically. It is really funny to see that they are going to offer new iPods before new MacBooks. It is so stupid. Perhaps in future they would like to be known as a company which sells music players and cellphones, not computers.

Can you explain in detail?

[trevorlsciact]

Originally Posted by holywarrior007

Although iPods and iPhones bring lots of revenues to Apple Inc. However it is not so good for Apple to focus on these things so much. Apple is known for computers, and of late they have given a low priorities to computers. It is really bad. They are not caring to be ahead of others in revamping the computers specifically. It is really funny to see that they are going to offer new iPods before new MacBooks. It is so stupid. Perhaps in future they would like to be known as a company which sells music players and cellphones, not computers.

They did drop the word computers from their name

[echosonic]

Originally Posted by holywarrior007

Although iPods and iPhones bring lots of revenues to Apple Inc. However it is not so good for Apple to focus on these things so much. Apple is known for computers, and of late they have given a low priorities to computers. It is really bad. They are not caring to be ahead of others in revamping the computers specifically. It is really funny to see that they are going to offer new iPods before new MacBooks. It is so stupid. Perhaps in future they would like to be known as a company which sells music players and cellphones, not computers.

This has been the goal all along. Remember when they officially changed their name from "Apple Computer" to "Apple, Inc."? Think that was on a whim?

It's called transition.

Apple is transitioning from a "Hi-Tech" company (like an Intel, Google, or DotCom) into a consumer electronics company (like a Sony, Panasonic, etc.).

AND, I disagree. being a software engineer who regularly works on pre-release builds of OSX, they work quite hard to improve the OS with every revision.

If you refer to the hardware, remember, they look to get a lot of life out of their machines. Have more patience.

[paxman]

Originally Posted by solipsism

It's already being shown to come over the beveled area. that means it's set in so the front isn't a smooth transtion from case to screen, or the screen jettisons over the sides.

I mean the aspect ratio looks like it is 4:3. Be nice if it was 16:9. It is nicely proportioned, though.

In terms of storage capacity I am guessing a size up from what it is now as long as the physical size remains the same, obviously. I am assuming you know more than me, here, so reading between your lines I take it this is not a possibility?

[wobegon]

Ugh, can't they just wait for Tuesday's press conference? iLounge just put in a predictable iPod touch redesign to add credibility to their Zuneish nano concept, which Kevin Rose then took as his own. Now the latter concept drawings are likely being used to drum up anticipation for a nonexistent product so the usual tech pundits can manufacture bad news from an otherwise positive press event.

[wizard69]

At this point I'm more interested in the Touch even though I have an iPhone. Music can stay on the iPhone and the potential is there for the use of the Touch for video only.

In any event here are some of the things I'm hoping for:

1.
Physical volume and mute controls.

2.
Analog in and high quality at that. Ideally using the same plug arraingement as the iPhone. While I'm certain that would quickly be put to use for VoIP I have other uses in mine. One would be for voice notes which a built in mic might handle it is just that external mics are more flexible.

3.
A USB port with host functionality. This ideally would be on a second physical connector but I'd settle for a port implemented on the dock connector. The idea being to support USB fully. Obviously there are limits on power here but being able to use card readers and flash dongles would be fantastic.

4.
I mentioned above a single mic input which should be high priority. Frankly though sterio in would be excellent especially if the inputs are high quality.

5.
BluTooth would be nice but I'm begining to wonder if Apple will ever support it fully. Blutooth just provides for a huge amount of I/O options.

6.
GPS. Mixed feelings here as it might drive up the price to much. One of the reasons that I mentioned USB and BluTooth first is that they give options for things like GPS. Still I believe that location aware apps will become huge.

7.
A camera. Here I'd like to say the following to Apple: "If you can't do it right don't bother". Thank you very much. Doing it right means having a physical shutter release button to start with. IPhone cam sucks in this respect as the touch screen just doesn't cut it for this sort of use. Since a camera might be limited to the high end how about dome high end controls. For example on screen sliders for exposure control. On the iPhone autoexposure screws up to much and frankly I get better results when I can control what is happening. As to mega pixels and all that crap, remember optical quality first and focus control. The Touch interface provides Apple with an amazing potential here to really own the compact camera market if they wanted to.

[nslyax]

While I'm not calling fake, I find it surprising that Apple would use AutoCAD. If they were Catia or ProE or SolidWorks, sure, but AutoCAD? Everyone uses 3D modeling software now for anything past very rough sketching.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by paxman

In terms of storage capacity I am guessing a size up from what it is now as long as the physical size remains the same, obviously. I am assuming you know more than me, here, so reading between your lines I take it this is not a possibility?

I've looked high and low for larger flash drives at lower prices but I can't find any. It was only in February that the 32GB Touch came out. They are just not coming out with 32B MicroSD cards and those cost over $300. It's too cost prohibitive. I think we'll see price drops and some minor changes changes across the board but the size of the Touch and Classic pretty concrete in size right now unless Apple changes things up in a major way... which they could do. I guess we'll find out next week.

[minderbinder]

Originally Posted by brianb08

Are the units here correct? Is it really mm or should it be cm. 0.42mm thinner... barely measurable!

I was wondering that too, it must be cm or it would be almost identical to the current one - might want to correct that, AI.

So looks like still 4:3, they're going sideways but no widescreen? Seems like a missed opportunity. And how does nano screen size compare to the current model, same or smaller?

[holywarrior007]

Originally Posted by solipsism

Can you explain in detail?

Yeah... I think Apple would have lost the computer market completely by now If Microsoft wasn't producing a terrible OS like Windows. Look at companies like Dell, HP and others. They have implemented new hardware into notebooks like new processors etc. They are so quick to upgrade the hardware. But Apple is sticking with minor incremental changes and is rather focusing on iPods, iPhones etc. Apple was always ahead in offering the best hardware possible in computers but now it looks they have lost the plot and are 'very busy' with music players and cellphones.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by holywarrior007

Yeah... I think Apple would have lost the computer market completely by now If Microsoft wasn't producing a terrible OS like Windows.

So all of Apple's year or year success with Mac sales have nothing to do with theheir halo-effect products, the Apple Stores, the Get A Mac commercials, or constant revisions to OS X and their HW?

Look at companies like Dell, HP and others. They have implemented new hardware into notebooks like new processors etc. They are so quick to upgrade the hardware. But Apple is sticking with minor incremental changes and is rather focusing on iPods, iPhones etc. Apple was always ahead in offering the best hardware possible in computers but now it looks they have lost the plot and are 'very busy' with music players and cellphones.

Apple has been releasing new processors with each Intel revision, which is about 2x a year. They are even releasing processors from Intel no one has (like the Santa Rosa/Penryns with Montevina features in the last iMac), no one wants until Apple uses it (like the MBA's small form factor 22mm^2 Santa Rosa Merom Processor), and that one has righty away (like the 3.2GHz 4-core "Harpertown" Xeons that were showcased in the Mac Pro).

• http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Portable_Macs

[dr_lha]

Originally Posted by brianb08

Are the units here correct? Is it really mm or should it be cm. 0.42mm thinner... barely measurable!

I'm assuming 0.42mm is correct, if the Nano was 0.42cm thinner then I think it would ridiculously thin, the current one is only 0.65cm thick after all.

[ronster]

Originally Posted by wizard69

5.
BlueTooth would be nice but I'm beginning to wonder if Apple will ever support it fully. Bluetooth just provides for a huge amount of I/O options.

6.
GPS. Mixed feelings here as it might drive up the price to much. One of the reasons that I mentioned USB and BlueTooth first is that they give options for things like GPS. Still I believe that location aware apps will become huge.

I hope Bluetooth is added...GPS is nice with Bluetooth, I can use my Bluetooth GPS dongle. also Bluetooth stereo headset would be nice to use in the gym.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by holywarrior007

Although iPods and iPhones bring lots of revenues to Apple Inc. However it is not so good for Apple to focus on these things so much. Apple is known for computers, and of late they have given a low priorities to computers. It is really bad.

I think it is way too late to object. Apple has been getting about as much money from iPods as they have from computers, this has been true for a few years now. Apple has been a consumer electronics company for a while. It may shift towards computers a bit as the iPod market is getting closer to saturation and Macs sales are growing as quickly as iPod sales did.

Originally Posted by bigmc6000

People still use AutoCAD?!?!?! Those mockups are u-g-l-y and the drawing tools are pretty crappy. That really looks like AutoCAD from when I was in college!

That style of drawing is pretty similar to what's on Apple's dev site so companies can design products around the iPods, such as the cases. Highly rendered drawings aren't necessary for that kind of user, it may even a hindrance, they don't need pretty, they just need the data.

[kenaustus]

On the touch side, what is the potential for Apple replacing the Classic with the touch? That would mean both SSD and a HD option in order to address those customers who need a large HD. That would be interesting as it moves OS X deeper into the iPod environment.

Could it be that the Shuffle will be the only iPod not using OS X?

[bigmc6000]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

That style of drawing is pretty similar to what's on Apple's dev site so companies can design products around the iPods, such as the cases. Highly rendered drawings aren't necessary for that kind of user, it may even a hindrance, they don't need pretty, they just need the data.

They don't give the diameters of the "holes." That's a pretty important one.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by bigmc6000

They don't give the diameters of the "holes." That's a pretty important one.

You're right on that. That's a more convincing argument.

[wobegon]

Originally Posted by kenaustus

On the touch side, what is the potential for Apple replacing the Classic with the touch? That would mean both SSD and a HD option in order to address those customers who need a large HD. That would be interesting as it moves OS X deeper into the iPod environment.

An HDD-sporting iPod touch would be heavier, thicker and have terrible battery life (because to eliminate interface latency, the disk would have to be spinning at all times).

Most people who need a large capacity iPod already have an iPod classic or iPod video. That's a niche market. Apple's best selling iPod was the nano in 2006 and in Apple's recent earnings notes, the iPod shuffle and iPod touch were their best selling iPods.

So it's far more likely Apple will simply retire the classic altogether. They didn't give it that name for nothing.

[holywarrior007]

Originally Posted by solipsism

So all of Apple's year or year success with Mac sales have nothing to do with theheir halo-effect products, the Apple Stores, the Get A Mac commercials, or constant revisions to OS X and their HW?



Apple has been releasing new processors with each Intel revision, which is about 2x a year. They are even releasing processors from Intel no one has (like the Santa Rosa/Penryns with Montevina features in the last iMac), no one wants until Apple uses it (like the MBA's small form factor 22mm^2 Santa Rosa Merom Processor), and that one has righty away (like the 3.2GHz 4-core "Harpertown" Xeons that were showcased in the Mac Pro).

• http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Portable_Macs

What about the laptops...can u compare the hardware with the latest that Dell is offering in Lattitude E series?

[Rokken]

Originally Posted by brianb08

Are the units here correct? Is it really mm or should it be cm. 0.42mm thinner... barely measurable!

It can hardly be 0.42cm thinner, otherwise it's going to be only 0.23cm thick. You can already call that a knife.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by holywarrior007

What about the laptops...can u compare the hardware with the latest that Dell is offering in Lattitude E series?

Can you supply some stats of a site that lists the specs we can compare them to newest chips by Intel. If they are new refreshes for Dell then the MB, MBP and MBA will all have these same chips too soon enough. Apple has used Intel's fastest chips, most efficient chips for it's notebooks since moving to Intel, sans the Extreme chips which use more power and thus run hotter. Dell and HP et al. have been getting the mass produced chips a little sooner than Apple, but you have to remember that Apple's entire line of notebooks uses only a handful of Intel's highest-end chips, non-Extreme chips, while the others sell most of their machines usng cheaper and/or older processors so the fact that Dell and HP outsell Apple in the budget in means nothing here because Apple doesn't compete there.


edit: These are definitely Montevina chip and they are nice for Dell notebooks and a major change for them, which they state. They are finally offering a backlit keyboard, too. They offer a 64GB SSD for an additional $650 over the default 80GB HDD price. I thought they would have been cheaper by now.

• http://direct2dell.com/one2one/archi...-as-usual.aspx

• http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...=MLB1355&s=biz

Pages two and four have prices, speed, chip size, etc. if you want to check them out...

• http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=3356&p=2

[holywarrior007]

I am not talking about the budget. Look at the Dell's website for stats..they offer Centrino 2 processor with 2.8 GHz speed, DDR3 RAM support and higher FSB. My point is that Apple is so focused on iPods and iPhones that they upgrade computer hardware after others have already done that. So they are no longer the pioneer in computer business (if u forget about the OS X for a sec.). iPods and iPhone can provide a good revenue in short term, however, in long term Apple will have to look back to computers if they want to survive in the market. So computers should be the first priority not iPods and iPhone..thats what I wanted to assert.

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by nofear1az

very different huh, you can tell that by the CAD drawing... amazing... I don't see 'very different' in those drawings but hey, it could be just me.

Perhaps I overstated that a tad.

It is both much larger and a different shape though. If it is for a camera, it's a needlessly large hole for the tiny iPhone camera lens and the wrong shape. It's different enough to make it questionable whether it's really for a camera at all.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by holywarrior007

I am not talking about the budget. Look at the Dell's website for stats..they offer Centrino 2 processor with 2.8 GHz speed, DDR3 RAM support and higher FSB. My point is that Apple is so focused on iPods and iPhones that they upgrade computer hardware after others have already done that. So they are no longer the pioneer in computer business (if u forget about the OS X for a sec.). iPods and iPhone can provide a good revenue in short term, however, in long term Apple will have to look back to computers if they want to survive in the market. So computers should be the first priority not iPods and iPhone..thats what I wanted to assert.

You either missed the point or aren't reading. How is Apple going to announce, and have their stores stocked with all models in all speeds that very day before others can announce them and have them on their websites for sale but shipping out days later? But that isn't even what your suggesting, you suggest that Apple doesn't care about Macs or its users because it doesn't have the next gen Intel chips well before other others due and in quantities that exceeding their competitors? How exactly is Apple going to get ahold of these Intel chips well before everyone else? These aren't some oddball chip that Intel is using Apple to promote, These are the the mainstream chips of which Apple uses a butt-load more than the others out of the gate. HP and Dell sell a lot more computers than Apple, but Apple has 66% of the >$1000 consumer notebook market and they do it with only using 6 different chips from Intel. That is not the same as Dell and HP using Intel's gamut and selling mostly old tech in <$700 notebooks.

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

You're right on that. That's a more convincing argument.

It's also entirely possible that this a real CAD drawing (which is an essential for any product BTW). The idea that because it "looks like AutoCAD" it must be a fake or something is just silly.

Most CAD programs have the ability to hide/show various layers or parts of the image so that one can see the wireframe in the absence of some of the measurements. What's to stop this from being an entirely real CAD drawing, with some of the messier layers hidden?

Like all rumours this could be completely fake, but a lot of the criticism of it here is unfounded and not very well thought out.

[bloggerblog]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

Could be real, but then again it's not that difficult to fake a CAD drawing.

I got curious after reading your Jessie Ventura footer, so I watched a YouTube. The guy is funny!

[wobegon]

Originally Posted by solipsism

HP and Dell sell a lot more computers than Apple, but Apple has 66% of the consumer notebook reason and does it with only using 6 different chips from Intel.

I believe 66% is how much Apple has of the $1000 consumer computer market as a whole, not laptops in particular.

That doesn't really make your point any less valid though. Apple is selling more laptops than desktops, so that percentage is likely higher.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by wobegon

I believe 66% is how much Apple has of the $1000 consumer computer market as a whole, not laptops in particular.

That doesn't really make your point any less valid though. Apple is selling more laptops than desktops, so that percentage is likely higher.

Oops, I did mean consumer laptops over $1000.