I can surely see similarities, but I can find similarities in apples and oranges.
What about those two pics makes you think that considerably smaller square display would be the replacement for the current Nano (not pictured) with a larger and widescreen display?
I don?t think it makes much sense. Also, that pictured display doesn?t look very high-res to me. The Nano has been able to play videos for years now and record video for a year now. That display doesn?t look acceptable for any video playback based on the apparent pixel density.
PS: What?s with those cables coming off the display? Why would the logic board be so far away from the display on either a new Nano or Shuffle?
Whatever it will be, it seems that the nano and the shuffle have their days counted.
I think it's a rather good idea to kill both products and present something in between. A shuffle-sized iPod with a nano-type screen in it. The biggest problem in that design is the absence of the click wheel, and the biggest reason why I'm somewhat skeptical about it.
I think that the Touch line up will be like this:
iPod Touch 2009 16 Gig - 199 dollars
iPod Touch 2010 32 Gig - 299 dollars (with retina display + HD camera + Facetime)
iPod Touch 2010 64 Gig - 399 dollars (rd+hd+FT)
... and no, the iTV operating system won't be iOS. That's just stupid. To take a multitouch interface towards the TV where you don't have multitouch at all. And no, its remote will not be the touch or the iPhone. That is just stupid for a couple of reasons:
- Have you got to have the iPhone and the Touch always with you to see iTV? What happens when you got your battery down? No iTV? That is stupid
- The Touch and the iPhone are personal devices. Remotes are the kind of stuff that you leave in the couch for *anyone*, including house guests, to pick it up. Who will leave their iPhone on the couch for a guest to pick up and control the iTV? That's just insanely nonsensical, but that doesn't stop otherwise smart people from sprouting this idea...
That is what I was thinking... Regardless of whether its water proof or not, this in a watch case would be awesome...
More than that, it would be quite the hilarious thing... to actually ship the product that Bill Gates has been trying to hype and sell for decades now, bwaahahahahahah!
New cases and screen protectors from overseas manufacturers have provided more evidence that Apple this week will unveil a dramatically redesigned iPod nano with a significantly smaller form factor....
If the second shot of the white rubber case is accurate, then the mockup at the top is completely not. So the first shot should probably be ignored in terms of what this thing will look like. It appears to be basically a shuffle, but the deal with Apple is that they can't bring themselves to make a product that has less special sauce than the previous years model. It always has to be better.
It's going to be like the old-gen shuffle with the giant clip on the back but having a screen on the front as in the lower rendering (except it won't be ugly like that). However, because it will be *bigger* than both the current and previous gen shuffles, they just can't bring themselves to *call* it a shuffle. They will argue probably that since it actually has controls and allows playlists that it isn't a shuffle per se anyway.
Unless the video camera is in one of those holes on the top and bottom it probably won't have video either. Even if it can *take* video, it won't be good for watching it, so .... they will have to keep the current nano around.
The way I see it, they announce this thing as the new nano, but the one form factor stays and gets a speed bump. They might even keep both of the old shuffles around as well.
Edit: The more I think of it and look at pics of the old shuffle, there does seem to be an extra hole in that case. Maybe the video camera is the hole by the dock connector hole?
If that thing is true, and it is water resistant you can bet that the sportwatches are in trouble right now.
People who think the wristwatch is a good form factor for mobile devices are making the same mistake that the people who think a book (that opens!) is a good form factor for a tablet.
By the time battery and wireless tech gets to the point where you could have something like this on your wrist and have it be actually useful, the people who remember "wrist-watches" will all be in old folks homes.
The shuffle will gain a screen, and the nano will be dropped.
There's a factor in this that limits what Apple can do. Cost.
If Apple could deliver a touchscreen Nano at a shuffle price point, I think the company would do that in a heartbeat. But it seems unlikely to me that such a device could be brought in at the Shuffle's current price points of (here in Canada) $69 and $89. The Nano right now is priced at $169 and $199. Seems to me we would realistically have to expect something closer to the latter than the former. Even if you split the difference, there's still a market for a $69 music player that basically just plays music.
PS: What’s with those cables coming off the display? Why would the logic board be so far away from the display on either a new Nano or Shuffle?
Good question.
But anyway if it is touch screen I think it would be kind of hard to use. The screen is much too small and my finger would pretty much cover where I am trying to press. Unless the clickweel is displayed, but that would make it harder to use (since you can use clickwheel blind and you don't have to power up the screen).
... and no, the iTV operating system won't be iOS. That's just stupid. To take a multitouch interface towards the TV where you don't have multitouch at all. ...
It only doesn't make any sense at all if you think of iOS as the multi-touch OS, as opposed to the ARM OS. In other words, what is iOS? Is it the OS that supports CocoaTouch? Or is it the lightweight version of OS X that runs on ARM processors. The focus on multi-touch as a reason why it doesn't make sense on AppleTV is mistaken in the latter case.
Looking at the pictures from the eBay listing of these cases, it's not a nano. It's a shuffle.
It has the distinctive power/shuffle/straight-playback switch that all shuffles have had previously and that no nano has ever had. The 30-pin USB and volume keys are just a boon.
that thing is butt ugly, but it is nicely portable. So they're going to kill the camera in it and i bet they don't have a touch screen, and instead some bastardized form of their shuffle controller on the headphones to control it because that terrible design needs to live on. \ NOT. If it's touch screen that could be nice, i just don't think it will be. I also don't think you'll see storage capacity increase nor the ability to use a camera for video recording.
It only doesn't make any sense at all if you think of iOS as the multi-touch OS, as opposed to the ARM OS. In other words, what is iOS? Is it the OS that supports CocoaTouch? Or is it the lightweight version of OS X that runs on ARM processors. The focus on multi-touch as a reason why it doesn't make sense on AppleTV is mistaken in the latter case.
Definitely, iOS is the CocoaTouch OS, which has access to the app store (iPod, iPad, iPhone). That's the important characteristic, not what goes under "the hood". For all we know, all of iDevices, including macs, sport some sort of OS X underneath.
So you see, it's just a semantical mistake to say that the iTV will sport that thing to which we call "iOS".
I am surprised that the case folks didn't tighten up a bit after the comment made about how leaky their pre-release security appears to be. Betting they sell way more if Apple allows for advance notice, which they will get more of if they learn to keep a secret.
I'm thinking that if this really is the design, they do need to tighten up. It's not easy, but risking loss of advance information for future products is not the way to go.
It seems a bit small for a nano, the taller nano was nice as it was easy to hold while controlling it.
Recent mock-up I made. Obviously, I need to make some changes...
I think your image showcases what I think is wrong with assuming this is the next iPod to replace the current Nano. If it was to replace the current Nano, why not make it rectangular with a rectangular display so it can offer the same or better image size for video playback. If the goal is to make the display a touchscreen then why make it square?
PS: Forum etiquette typically is to resize or to hyperlink to overly large images.
Definitely, iOS is the CocoaTouch OS, which has access to the app store (iPod, iPad, iPhone). That's the important characteristic, not what goes under "the hood". For all we know, all of iDevices, including macs, sport some sort of OS X underneath.
So you see, it's just a semantical mistake to say that the iTV will sport that thing to which we call "iOS".
Well, if Apple releases an ARM based AppleTV, and says it runs iOS, then that's what it runs, even if it doesn't support a touch interface. Basically, iOS is whatever they say it is. (And there's no requirement that touch and access to the app store go together. Nor any requirement that a particular device that uses the app store be able to run all app store apps -- e.g., an iPhone doesn't run iPad apps.)
Comments
i want to buy !!
9
Is there a way to resize images? Sorry for the size.
image: http://modmyi.com/images/Messany/APPLEPRO.jpg
image: http://news.cnet.com/i/bto/20080324/...o2_270x339.jpg
(source: com.com)
Looks similar to me.
I can surely see similarities, but I can find similarities in apples and oranges.
What about those two pics makes you think that considerably smaller square display would be the replacement for the current Nano (not pictured) with a larger and widescreen display?
I don?t think it makes much sense. Also, that pictured display doesn?t look very high-res to me. The Nano has been able to play videos for years now and record video for a year now. That display doesn?t look acceptable for any video playback based on the apparent pixel density.
PS: What?s with those cables coming off the display? Why would the logic board be so far away from the display on either a new Nano or Shuffle?
I think it's a rather good idea to kill both products and present something in between. A shuffle-sized iPod with a nano-type screen in it. The biggest problem in that design is the absence of the click wheel, and the biggest reason why I'm somewhat skeptical about it.
I think that the Touch line up will be like this:
iPod Touch 2009 16 Gig - 199 dollars
iPod Touch 2010 32 Gig - 299 dollars (with retina display + HD camera + Facetime)
iPod Touch 2010 64 Gig - 399 dollars (rd+hd+FT)
... and no, the iTV operating system won't be iOS. That's just stupid. To take a multitouch interface towards the TV where you don't have multitouch at all. And no, its remote will not be the touch or the iPhone. That is just stupid for a couple of reasons:
- Have you got to have the iPhone and the Touch always with you to see iTV? What happens when you got your battery down? No iTV? That is stupid
- The Touch and the iPhone are personal devices. Remotes are the kind of stuff that you leave in the couch for *anyone*, including house guests, to pick it up. Who will leave their iPhone on the couch for a guest to pick up and control the iTV? That's just insanely nonsensical, but that doesn't stop otherwise smart people from sprouting this idea...
That is what I was thinking... Regardless of whether its water proof or not, this in a watch case would be awesome...
More than that, it would be quite the hilarious thing... to actually ship the product that Bill Gates has been trying to hype and sell for decades now, bwaahahahahahah!
New cases and screen protectors from overseas manufacturers have provided more evidence that Apple this week will unveil a dramatically redesigned iPod nano with a significantly smaller form factor....
If the second shot of the white rubber case is accurate, then the mockup at the top is completely not. So the first shot should probably be ignored in terms of what this thing will look like. It appears to be basically a shuffle, but the deal with Apple is that they can't bring themselves to make a product that has less special sauce than the previous years model. It always has to be better.
It's going to be like the old-gen shuffle with the giant clip on the back but having a screen on the front as in the lower rendering (except it won't be ugly like that). However, because it will be *bigger* than both the current and previous gen shuffles, they just can't bring themselves to *call* it a shuffle. They will argue probably that since it actually has controls and allows playlists that it isn't a shuffle per se anyway.
Unless the video camera is in one of those holes on the top and bottom it probably won't have video either. Even if it can *take* video, it won't be good for watching it, so .... they will have to keep the current nano around.
The way I see it, they announce this thing as the new nano, but the one form factor stays and gets a speed bump. They might even keep both of the old shuffles around as well.
Edit: The more I think of it and look at pics of the old shuffle, there does seem to be an extra hole in that case. Maybe the video camera is the hole by the dock connector hole?
Steve said people didn't like it. That's why they went back to the tall/skinny. He's not an idiot.
I love the fat-boy nanos - a perfect fit in my hand. I don't like the long skinny curved screen ones.
If that thing is true, and it is water resistant you can bet that the sportwatches are in trouble right now.
People who think the wristwatch is a good form factor for mobile devices are making the same mistake that the people who think a book (that opens!) is a good form factor for a tablet.
By the time battery and wireless tech gets to the point where you could have something like this on your wrist and have it be actually useful, the people who remember "wrist-watches" will all be in old folks homes.
The shuffle will gain a screen, and the nano will be dropped.
There's a factor in this that limits what Apple can do. Cost.
If Apple could deliver a touchscreen Nano at a shuffle price point, I think the company would do that in a heartbeat. But it seems unlikely to me that such a device could be brought in at the Shuffle's current price points of (here in Canada) $69 and $89. The Nano right now is priced at $169 and $199. Seems to me we would realistically have to expect something closer to the latter than the former. Even if you split the difference, there's still a market for a $69 music player that basically just plays music.
PS: What’s with those cables coming off the display? Why would the logic board be so far away from the display on either a new Nano or Shuffle?
Good question.
But anyway if it is touch screen I think it would be kind of hard to use. The screen is much too small and my finger would pretty much cover where I am trying to press. Unless the clickweel is displayed, but that would make it harder to use (since you can use clickwheel blind and you don't have to power up the screen).
Maybe it's part of the iTV remote?
My Crappy paint concept of the remote.
The shuffle will gain a screen, and the nano will be dropped.
Why would they drop Nano? I think that's most preferred iPod after touch!
Why would they drop Nano? I think that's most preferred iPod after touch!
They dropped the iPod mini when it was the "most preferred".
'Course, they introduced the nano to compensate. Hence this new device?
... and no, the iTV operating system won't be iOS. That's just stupid. To take a multitouch interface towards the TV where you don't have multitouch at all. ...
It only doesn't make any sense at all if you think of iOS as the multi-touch OS, as opposed to the ARM OS. In other words, what is iOS? Is it the OS that supports CocoaTouch? Or is it the lightweight version of OS X that runs on ARM processors. The focus on multi-touch as a reason why it doesn't make sense on AppleTV is mistaken in the latter case.
Looking at the pictures from the eBay listing of these cases, it's not a nano. It's a shuffle.
It has the distinctive power/shuffle/straight-playback switch that all shuffles have had previously and that no nano has ever had. The 30-pin USB and volume keys are just a boon.
that thing is butt ugly, but it is nicely portable. So they're going to kill the camera in it and i bet they don't have a touch screen, and instead some bastardized form of their shuffle controller on the headphones to control it because that terrible design needs to live on.
It only doesn't make any sense at all if you think of iOS as the multi-touch OS, as opposed to the ARM OS. In other words, what is iOS? Is it the OS that supports CocoaTouch? Or is it the lightweight version of OS X that runs on ARM processors. The focus on multi-touch as a reason why it doesn't make sense on AppleTV is mistaken in the latter case.
Definitely, iOS is the CocoaTouch OS, which has access to the app store (iPod, iPad, iPhone). That's the important characteristic, not what goes under "the hood". For all we know, all of iDevices, including macs, sport some sort of OS X underneath.
So you see, it's just a semantical mistake to say that the iTV will sport that thing to which we call "iOS".
I am surprised that the case folks didn't tighten up a bit after the comment made about how leaky their pre-release security appears to be. Betting they sell way more if Apple allows for advance notice, which they will get more of if they learn to keep a secret.
I'm thinking that if this really is the design, they do need to tighten up. It's not easy, but risking loss of advance information for future products is not the way to go.
It seems a bit small for a nano, the taller nano was nice as it was easy to hold while controlling it.
Full Size
Recent mock-up I made. Obviously, I need to make some changes...
edit: Yea, sorry. Was in the process of a resize.
image: http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m...Comparison.jpg
Recent mock-up I made. Obviously, I need to make some changes...
I think your image showcases what I think is wrong with assuming this is the next iPod to replace the current Nano. If it was to replace the current Nano, why not make it rectangular with a rectangular display so it can offer the same or better image size for video playback. If the goal is to make the display a touchscreen then why make it square?
PS: Forum etiquette typically is to resize or to hyperlink to overly large images.
Definitely, iOS is the CocoaTouch OS, which has access to the app store (iPod, iPad, iPhone). That's the important characteristic, not what goes under "the hood". For all we know, all of iDevices, including macs, sport some sort of OS X underneath.
So you see, it's just a semantical mistake to say that the iTV will sport that thing to which we call "iOS".
Well, if Apple releases an ARM based AppleTV, and says it runs iOS, then that's what it runs, even if it doesn't support a touch interface. Basically, iOS is whatever they say it is. (And there's no requirement that touch and access to the app store go together. Nor any requirement that a particular device that uses the app store be able to run all app store apps -- e.g., an iPhone doesn't run iPad apps.)