Apple's next iPod nano may resemble tiny iPhone, feature dedicated iTunes service - Page 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 


It would be the worst decision made at Apple since before Steve's return.

You can say what you want.  Your opinions have always been worthless.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun, UK 

The only reason I can think of that they would change the Nano...

Or because the current design has horrible sales figures which, based on what I see on the street, could very likely be the case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 


Yes, given that feature phones are completely worthless and you can get an iPhone free on contract (or for a few hundred with PAYG).

Not everyone needs or wants the internet in their pocket.

I know a very talented and successful iOS developer who doesn't own any mobile device (phone or tablet). He likes being able to get away from it all.

My wife and I have cell phones for emergencies. They're 7 year old flip phones that are so primitive I wouldn't even call them "feature phones", but they send & receive calls and texts just fine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lvidal 


That doesn't mean Apple couldn't make a new nano design with physical buttons that have the same functionalities as the shuffle.
For me the shuffle must die with an evolution of that nano into a really great wrist gadget that could interact with the iPhone. And that little device in one or two years could push FaceTime to the places nobody has ever gone before.
It is the perfect device for a new Apple revolution.

Right after the quantum leap in battery technology to power such a device for the purposes your propose.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bregalad 

Not everyone needs or wants the internet in their pocket.

 

I know a very talented and successful iOS developer who doesn't own any mobile device (phone or tablet). He likes being able to get away from it all.

 

My wife and I have cell phones for emergencies. They're 7 year old flip phones that are so primitive I wouldn't even call them "feature phones", but they send & receive calls and texts just fine.

I must say there are times I need a phone for basic communication (calls, texts) where I wish I still had my old flip phone instead of my iPhone. More portable (smaller, lighter), less valuable (theft, loss, damage), etc. I know people seem to want a "convergence" of their devices, but I'd rather have an iPhone nano along with another device of my chosing (Touch, iPad mini, iPad, laptop, etc). Not the one-size-fits-all solution currently offered. Need the laptop, take that. Only need some basics, get a Touch. Need to travel light, leave them all at home and just take the iPhone nano. And it would be a perfect family of devices for something like Verizon's Share Everything plan.

game changing would be if this were the Apple iPhone for pre-paid / low end phone users. A smart phone for the masses. the drug^H^H^H^H^H phone that gets them hooked for the iPhone full on experience. So simple phone plus iPod Touch tech, no data, other than WiFi, ago GPS, no compass, no gyro, no accelerometer, etc. And subsidized price is free, under $100 for pre-paid providers ... Fixed 256Meg of memory and 4GB of storage, and maybe GSM technology only no CDMA... except CDMA opens China where this would sell better than iPhones already sell ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wiggin 

 

Or because the current design has horrible sales figures which, based on what I see on the street, could very likely be the case.

That could be very true. I can honestly say I don't think I've ever seen anyone out on the street with the current iPod Nano but I still see lots of people with the previous "long" design model.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bregalad 

Not everyone needs or wants the internet in their pocket.

 

I know a very talented and successful iOS developer who doesn't own any mobile device (phone or tablet). He likes being able to get away from it all.

 

My wife and I have cell phones for emergencies. They're 7 year old flip phones that are so primitive I wouldn't even call them "feature phones", but they send & receive calls and texts just fine.

I had my network operator block internet access on my phone because I don't want to pay for an expensive data plan.

I like the PDA features & app's on my phone but I don't need the internet in my pocket on a tiny little screen.

No nano has been as good as the old "fat boy" nano - it's been all downhill from there.

This is a total fail from the get go.  The way to improve the Nano is to make it a watch and give it both GPS and bluetooth.  Other than that most people will just use their phones for media.

Quote:

Originally Posted by halhiker 

This is a total fail from the get go.  The way to improve the Nano is to make it a watch and give it both GPS and bluetooth.  Other than that most people will just use their phones for media.

I use a LunaTik and I would love, as some on this thread have suggested, to have a new clipless watch-sized Nano that can serve as an iPhone iPod or iPad remote.

I would also love to have the old Nano back, or an iPod Touch Mini (or iPhone Mini) in the same form factor as the rectangular nano.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Filmantopia 

This raises some interesting questions. Will the nano continue to run the iPod OS, or bump up to a legitimate iOS device? Are apps a consideration for the nano? Keyboard text input? Wifi connectivity? AirPlay? Apple TV controller capability?
I doubt they'd waste much real estate on the front of the device as in the mockup. It would probably have a bigger display.
Although this could cause some minor software fragmentation, it could also feasibly become a key part of the iOS ecosystem. More of a "iPod Touch Nano" I wonder if that is the strategy here.

It seems more likely to me that they will introduce this device as a new ipod mini with ios. A home button would suggest it will be app enabled. Wifi would be great, if the battery can support it, as that would enable airplay and apple tv remote.

The nano will remain a small square, keep it's ipod os (for now) and maybe even shrink in size so that it can replace the shuffle. That would keep the future ipod lineup to only 3 distinctive products and all with a graphical touch interface.

So i will have to buy another company's device that doesn't integrate as well with iTunes?  I think the simplicity of the shuffle is very in sync with Apple.  It's stripped down to the absolute basics.  That doesn't make it a POS.  We may have to agree to disagree on this one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wiggin 

 

Seriously? In the nearly two years the current design has been around, I've seen exactly 2 "in the wild". I actually see more iPod minis (yes, "mini") than the current nano design. The current nano is, in my opinion, 2nd only to the buttonless shuffle as the worst iPod designs. Sure, maybe it's cute and fashionable to some folks, but from a practicality and functionality standpoint they were both quite bad designs.

Yes, seriously. You see few in the wild not because the design sucks, but because almost nobody buys vanilla music devices anymore. Where are they supposed to go with MP3 players now? You've got the Classic to fill the increasingly irrelevant traditional screen + tactile controls + tons of storage niche, the iPod touch is basically an iPhone, and the shuffle is for the no-nonsense, tiny, out of the way, audio-only, good for exercise crowd. Where does the nano fit in? Back when music players were all the rage it made sense to have a fashionable "mini" version of the classic but now most people have smartphones and tablets that do the same and much more. The nano can't continue to exist as just a svelte MP3 player. So I liked where they were (or seemed to be) going with the current design: a wearable, iOS-like touch device. They obviously recognized in the second revision that people liked to use it as a watch, too. What they need to do now is make it (and promote it as) a true companion to your iPhone, delivering notifications, Siri controls, perhaps even low resolution video/facetime over Bluetooth. And cut the cord, use wireless earbuds to make it even more wearable. [i]That[/i] would make it distinct and tie it to the products people actually buy nowadays; this new design will basically send it back to 2007.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lvidal 

No, no, no. I don't like that. I hope they don't do it. The next things must be:

 

• Kill the shuffle
• Seriously convert the nano in the iWatch (iTime, whatever...). Throw that clip away, please...
• Rename the Touch to simply iPod, and upgrade its camera and storage up to 128GB
• Kill the Classic. About time...
• Release that iPad Mini, if it really makes sense.
• Release iPhone 5, The New iPhone, whatever they gonna name it...
• Upgrade iMacs

 

Happy Holidays....

Won't be an iPhone 5, so why include that guess? Otherwise, good list. I'd like to see Apple down to two iPods, or even one, but still have a wearable device that can hopefully act as a real-time widget display one day. This product could develop separately from iPod.

Just getting back into running and love the Nike + apps for tracking my runs.  But I hate running with my iPhone so I thought about a Nano.  However, I may wait a few months to see what comes out.   I don't really need any more features just hate buying something at the end of its life cycle from Apple.

This is only my opinion and observations, but i've heard this from many other people.

If I were to make an update to the iPod line, one must first look at what kinds of people (nowadays) uses the iPod line.

To me, there are 4 kinds of iPod users, and as a caveat, let's just assume that people who currently want an new iPod for the purpose of audio on-the-go.

1. they want an iPhone but don't want the phone contract = iPod Touch
2. they want to use an iPod (and as a dedicated audio device) all day long and want lot's of music on it = iPod Classic
3. they want an iPod that's fully featured, but are price focused = iPod Nano
4. they want to listen to music on short commutes and for exercising = iPod Nano/Shuffle

So based on that assumption, what I would do is this:

• Drop the shuffle, since the current Nano is about the same thing.
• Add a few "eyes free" features to the Nano (i.e. voice control, maybe forward/back buttons and wifi iTunes sync.) to satisfy the people who used the shuffle for exercise.
• Make a 4gb and 8gb Nano and drop the price to $79 & $99
• Created an all new smaller/thinner "Classic" that's SSD (64gb & 128gb), keep the click wheel and add wifi iTunes and add a camera for still photos and video.  Then priced it at $199 and $249.
• KEEP THE 30-pin DOCK PLEASE!!!  there are so many car-accessories that are factory built-in that changing the docking plug will really piss people off.

I love the idea of a "feature-phone" iPhone Nano.  I know i use my phone very little on my iPhone and use the other features about 95/5.

However, I'm not sure if this should converge with anything in the "iPod" line.  I would see it as a separate device and part of the iPhone line.

And I only say this as a personal opinion, but for me, I need storage more than iPhone-like features, and I want it to be eye-free.  But the classic is just too expensive currently.  So if the device you show is 64-128gb and less than $249, I might consider it.  Then I could easily see dropping my current iPhone for that, since I have an iPad2 and are never without a back-pack.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin 

They already got the design spot on when they introduced the iPod Nano 6G:Right at the start, they chop the bottom off and that's it. They don't need a home button because it's small enough to reach a button on the side no matter how you hold it just like the square one. It would look like the following:

The size means you can fit the iPhone's portrait keyboard in landscape with one less row. Kids can contact each other with iMessage with a simple data contract using a mini-sim or just wifi, maybe even call each other with VOIP apps and save running up parents' bills.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 


I dunno about dropping the shuffle, but I agree with your second and third point, the third provided they can manage that.
The classic just needs discontinued. A 128GB iPod touch is the replacement.
And the 30-pin Dock Connector is being carried to the graveyard right now. Apple will have a $5 adapter that you'll plug into that built-in connector. Boom. Problem solved. Same with the tens of millions of other accessories, and the new connector will be a multi-billion dollar industry as everyone who ever made a product before can now make it again.

yep, sorry it's 30-pin.

well, i'd be happy if they made an adapter, would make me less pissed that i just bought a 2012 VW and couldn't plug-in my ipod because the dedicated plug is incompatible.

I could see a 128gb Touch, but if you have an iphone but want the storage of the Classic, what would be the point?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jj.yuan 

This product, although may be false, feels like what Apple would do as a "game changer". Maybe it will serve as a mini iPod Touch so that the regular iPod Touch can grow to something like 5" diagonal? If so, this Nano should run iOS apps ... just a wild guess
 

Here's hoping it's just as you said, an "iPod Touch Mini", and they keep the current iPod Nano (although a capacity bump would be nice). I love using it when I work out and don't want to see it go away!