or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple announces new iPod nano with multi-touch display
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple announces new iPod nano with multi-touch display - Page 2

post #41 of 117
Might want to snag an "old" nano, Video capability and camera
post #42 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by daylove22 View Post

It's a music player...we do not need a camera on it.

Oh! Steve forgot that last Sept. ?
Same Apple. Same Mac. Different Take. Different Place. http://Applemacness.com
Reply
Same Apple. Same Mac. Different Take. Different Place. http://Applemacness.com
Reply
post #43 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

16gb = $179.

you know what you can also get for 200 bucks? an xbox 360, a wii, or 2/3rds of a ps3.
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
post #44 of 117
It seems much more likely that Apple just re-skinned the old iPod software and added a few things like touch support then get iOS working on this thing. iOS is overkill anyway for a device with no need for a TCP/IP stack.

Also the apple website makes no mention of iOS for the nano.
post #45 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aslak View Post

It seems much more likely that Apple just re-skinned the old iPod software and added a few things like touch support then get iOS working on this thing. iOS is overkill anyway for a device with no need for a TCP/IP stack.

Probably. It could evolve some more iOS-like features. But you've probably nailed this.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #46 of 117
What an absolutely class piece of design, I really like this. Well done Apple.
post #47 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Apple made an interesting and odd (to me) physical design decision in making the border/edge on the top and bottom much thinner (visually) than the sides. Looking at the dimensions (1.48" x 1.61") it seems they could have made it only slightly taller (1.61") and made that border visually the same on all four sides.



Seems like an odd detail to have overlooked (for Apple).

that's very true.
post #48 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Obviously, they want you to move up to the iPod touch, the entry level model, which I think people will do. However, I agree this would make one heck of a watch.

post #49 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parsec View Post

What an absolutely class piece of design, I really like this. Well done Apple.

Be gone troll

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #50 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post


You got it, but now give me a nice, thin band so I can wear this with regular clothes, not just a Jersey Shore Adidas track suit.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #51 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Apple made an interesting and odd (to me) physical design decision in making the border/edge on the top and bottom much thinner (visually) than the sides. Looking at the dimensions (1.48" x 1.61") it seems they could have made it only slightly taller (1.61") and made that border visually the same on all four sides.



Seems like an odd detail to have overlooked (for Apple).

My guess is that the slightly extended side areas serve the same purpose as the iPad bezel-- to make spurious touch events less likely (since you have to grasp that edge to lever the clip).

So the wider side case area is functional and the smaller top and bottom area is because Apple makes everything as small as humanly possible, and that trumped symmetry.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #52 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aslak View Post

It seems much more likely that Apple just re-skinned the old iPod software and added a few things like touch support then get iOS working on this thing. iOS is overkill anyway for a device with no need for a TCP/IP stack.

Also the apple website makes no mention of iOS for the nano.

It all depends on what you consider iOS, however. Since it's all the OS X codebase, plus Cocoa Touch minus unneeded I/O stuff (very roughly speaking) arguably any device that sports some subset of the Cocoa Touch API on top of OS X underpinnings (however truncated) is "iOS."

This is indeed overkill for a device like the Nano, but I could see Apple wanting to move as much stuff as possible over to that neck of the woods, even if in a highly minimized version.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #53 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post



Seems like an odd detail to have overlooked (for Apple).

From the photos the left-right sides appear to be radiused, not square corners like the top and bottom. The real thing probably looks perfectly well proportioned.

Apple's attention to detail borders on the pathologically obsessive (as I'm sure you're aware). I don't believe this is something they would have overlooked.
A is A
Reply
A is A
Reply
post #54 of 117
Thank goodness I have a 5th Generation iPod Nano. My fingers are too big to use this thing. Just because you can make something smaller doesn't necessarily mean it will be a better device.
post #55 of 117
When jobs was launching this he had the pic of the Old Long nano. Then the clickwheel drove away. They should have kept it like that. No need to make it square, just keep the same sized display as the now old nano.

I don't think we need two shuffles, which is basically what we've got now. I think the new nano will do the worst of the three updated iPods. Shuffle will probably improve the most in terms of sales.
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
post #56 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

No question this is more of a shuffle on steroids than a real nano replacement...
While there is some cool factor here, the biggest thing about this is it seems like Apple tried to make it LESS appealing for most users to push them up to a touch. And in many cases it will probably work.

I agree.
This just seems like a Had-To-Do-Something style makeover for the Nano.
I liked the Nano tall, and the square, and sort of like/disliked the last tall-but-curved (so that it rocked when trying to use it laying flat).

Pulling off the control wheel/buttons and larger screen seem like intentional feature removal to steer people away from it.
All the while with a forced smile and saying 'isn't this new one cooler and better'.

Dumb move Apple on the Nano.
Sad.
The Universe is Intelligent and Friendly
Reply
The Universe is Intelligent and Friendly
Reply
post #57 of 117
I won't keep ranting on the 6th Generation Nano's features and form factor or the fact that you get less for your money than the previous generation. And I won't even rant that the new model appears to be a solution in search of a problem.

However, I think the new Nano will be a lackluster seller, but it very well may significantally canibalize sales of the Shuffle. If I really wanted the Shuffle's size, I would go for the Nano instead.

Finally, if you ever had a desire to own a 5th Generation Nano, especially a 16GB model, this would be the time to buy it, because I suspect there will be a run on them.
post #58 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoadWarrior56 View Post

However, I think the new Nano will be a lackluster seller, but it very well may significantally canibalize sales of the Shuffle. If I really wanted the Shuffle's size, I would go for the Nano instead.

This is pretty much the exact device that I wanted. I dont care what its called, I wanted a clip on iPod with Nike+. Ill be getting a blue one on day one, unless that colour is gone then Ill get whatever colour they have available.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #59 of 117
Watch? Did someone say watch? Here's some quick mock ups.! Finally the Apple watch I've been waiting for all these years.



That's me in the last photo!
post #60 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce Young View Post

I agree.
This just seems like a Had-To-Do-Something style makeover for the Nano.
I liked the Nano tall, and the square, and sort of like/disliked the last tall-but-curved (so that it rocked when trying to use it laying flat).

Pulling off the control wheel/buttons and larger screen seem like intentional feature removal to steer people away from it.
All the while with a forced smile and saying 'isn't this new one cooler and better'.

Dumb move Apple on the Nano.
Sad.

By giving consumers a taste of multi-touch with the nano, they may spend the extra few bucks to get the iPod touch entry model instead. The lack of FM radio on the touch is a downer, but access to apps and the iTunes store is a major plus.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #61 of 117
Well, I think this design is absolutely gorgeous and a huge step above the old nano. It's a super powerful digital music player with a sleek UI, a perfect case, high quality materials and a very nice form factor.

I've got a first (dead battery) and second generation nano (retired since iPhone) but the new nano is very tempting just for the cool looks (yes, I'm shallow in this regard but lots of people like shiny new pretty things).
post #62 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Apple made an interesting and odd (to me) physical design decision in making the border/edge on the top and bottom much thinner (visually) than the sides. Looking at the dimensions (1.48" x 1.61") it seems they could have made it only slightly taller (1.61") and made that border visually the same on all four sides.



Seems like an odd detail to have overlooked (for Apple).


OMG! Alert Jony! He overlooked the basic shape and form!
post #63 of 117
I think the nano lost video playback, and the video camera. Not that nanos were really best suited to video, but I think the more focused approach of a "shuffle with video screen" is a net gain for the device. The iPod Touch now seems to be where video resides, and it makes more sense.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #64 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

I think the nano lost video playback, and the video camera. Not that nanos were really best suited to video, but I think the more focused approach of a "shuffle with video screen" is a net gain for the device. The iPod Touch now seems to be where video resides, and it makes more sense.

I'm struggling to see how this device might effectively be operated single handedly. It's pretty and all but if you have to hold it with two hands to operate it properly what's the point of making it so small?

Is the ultimate 'dicks out' moment for Apple?
post #65 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly View Post

I'm struggling to see how this device might effectively be operated single handedly.

One hand + clip ? Otherwise why have a clip?

+1 to using it as a watch.
post #66 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647 View Post

I guarantee this won't sell like the old nano. Runners liked it for the click wheel, the big screen, etc. You know how hard it is going to be to read this thing in an arm band (I have a nano 2gen, i know). It needs to be somewhat visible to change settings while running. How in the hell do you pause the workout while running when you come to a stop light? Apple failed on so many levels here. I'm buying the old one. Lets not even get into the fact they STILL haven't upped the capacity. It's been 16gb max for the last 3 gens.

Agreed MAJOR fail here. Nano sales are going to crash. They might as well have just killed it altogether. The iPod Touch is very good, but the old nano was such a nicely balanced product -- great form factor and feature set for the price.

This is just unbelievably stupid. Puke.
post #67 of 117
You really would think Apple would have learned the lesson from the previous Shuffle, there is such a thing as pointlessly small. Utility is all.

I think if you had the old and new Nanos on sale in a store side by side, the old one would outsell the new 3:1. It is too small and too fiddly for what gain?

The new Touch and Shuffle are good, but the Nano is a fail in my eyes.
post #68 of 117
I absolutely HATE the new Nano. Makes me glad I bought my wife the 5th gen. She loves watching vids and using the built-in camera. The new nano doesn't do either. It's now just a beefed-up Shuffle.

Apple is obviously forcing folks to invest in a Classic or Touch if they want to have the video capabilities. LAME.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #69 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamthecarny View Post

One hand + clip ? Otherwise why have a clip?

Without trying to be condescending, to clip it to stuff?

In the case where you might clip it to your waistband, for instance, it would become even more hopeless to operate.

Quote:
+1 to using it as a watch.

That would be fine if the screen was on all the time, I guess.

I'll probably be proven wrong, but I don't see where Apple is going with this and I don't think it will be a big sales winner.
post #70 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647 View Post

It needs to be somewhat visible to change settings while running. How in the hell do you pause the workout while running when you come to a stop light?

Voice Control? Physical buttons on the appropriate earphones?

Use for runners won't be possible for those actually paying attention and not just taking a superficial glance.
post #71 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Voice Control? Physical buttons on the appropriate earphones?

Use for runners won't be possible for those actually paying attention and not just taking a superficial glance.

Voice control while running? I don't know about you, but when I've ran 5 miles, I'm not exactly understandable and gabby.

I have yet to see physical buttons on the appropriate earphones that I'd run. The only remote I've seen is the one by belkin and it falls apart after 30 days. This is just another sign in a pattern that apple doesn't think through their designs all the way.

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #72 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly View Post

Without trying to be condescending, to clip it to stuff?

In the case where you might clip it to your waistband, for instance, it would become even more hopeless to operate.

I control my iPhone just fine without looking at it, and the Nano will be even better as it will read back audio info as I switch (at least I think it’s picking up that great Shuffle feature), not to mention the headphone cable controls.

Quote:
I’ll probably be proven wrong, but I don't see where Apple is going with this and I don't think it will be a big sales winner.

I thought this was the most exciting part of this presentation for a product, I think the most interesting thing is how phenomenally well HTTP Live Streaming worked. How many people were watching this? How many DoS and other attacks did they deal with during the presentation today?

I can’t wait for this to hit the shelves. It’s the SuperShuffle I’ve been hoping for, it’s just called a Nano. If Apple doesn’t offer an SDK (which I don’t think they ever will) I hope they let Nike use that 30-pin connector to make a wristband that had a heart rate monitor built in. maybe even a BT transmitter for BT headphones for those in need.


Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647 View Post

Voice control while running? I don't know about you, but when I've ran 5 miles, I'm not exactly understandable and gabby.

I have yet to see physical buttons on the appropriate earphones that I'd run. The only remote I've seen is the one by belkin and it falls apart after 30 days. This is just another sign in a pattern that apple doesn't think through their designs all the way.

The Apple ones I had held up great. I lost them and then bought more expensive brand. The bass was a little better but there overall not as good as Apple’s in-ear phones. Both had controls on the cable that were great while running, or just in general. next time I’ll go back to Apple’s headphones.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #73 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

The Apple ones I had held up great. I lost them and then bought more expensive brand. The bass was a little better but there overall not as good as Apples in-ear phones. Both had controls on the cable that were great while running, or just in general. next time Ill go back to Apples headphones.

The apple ear buds? Those fall out of my ears every 30 meters. Or do they have an optional remote that you can add any headphones to?

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #74 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647 View Post

The apple ear buds? Those fall out of my ears every 30 meters. Or do they have an optional remote that you can add any headphones to?

in-ear phones. the ones that go into the canal. Not hose ear buds. Ive used them on only a couple occasions over the years and they just rip my cartilage to threads why only sounding decent when the phones are oddly positioned incorrectly with the speaker portion to the side.

For the price they are pretty decent sound, but its all the other aspects of the design i like compared to other brands of tried.
http://www.apple.com/ipod/in-ear-headphones/
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #75 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

And videos? Nope. Not on a square screen. Not for me.

well, IMAX is actually almost square and nobody complains, so what's the deal? :-)))
post #76 of 117
Lol

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #77 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peruna View Post

So, let me get this straight. Apple not only takes away the ability to shoot video, but now you can't even play videos? Then they remove the click wheel so you can't operate it without unclipping the dern thing and looking at it? So much for ease of operation working in the gym, yard or wherever. And they keep the same capacities and the same price?

While I applaud them learning their lesson and going back to a wheel on the shuffle, that lesson was not apparently learned when revamping the Nano. Unlike the iPod Touch where the touch screen is fundamental, the touch screen on the Nano does nothing the wheel couldn't do and in fact does it worse! I think they have a disaster on their hands here.

they need a new disaster now that 4.1 is coming

and they gimped the nano hard so you buy the touch instead
post #78 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert View Post

you know what you can also get for 200 bucks? an xbox 360, a wii, or 2/3rds of a ps3.

So go get them? Who is making you buy an iPod nano, tell me then we can protect you!
post #79 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647 View Post

Voice control while running? I don't know about you, but when I've ran 5 miles, I'm not exactly understandable and gabby.

I have yet to see physical buttons on the appropriate earphones that I'd run. The only remote I've seen is the one by belkin and it falls apart after 30 days. This is just another sign in a pattern that apple doesn't think through their designs all the way.

You do know that the new Nano has physical volume buttons?
post #80 of 117
All this moaning about the new design, and no one has even tried them yet.

Sure it may not be what you want, but others will love it.

I have ordered a Product Red version, can't wait :-)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple announces new iPod nano with multi-touch display