Apple's new iPod nano to maintain price points, won't push out shuffle - sources

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014
Sixth-generation iPod nanos on deck for an introduction by Apple on Wednesday will reportedly be priced in-line with existing models and will not replace the company's other diminutive media player, the iPod shuffle.



Although the new nano, built around a 1.7-inch display, is expected to sport similar dimensions to the second-generation clip-on iPod shuffle, people familiar with Apple's plans say the company will continue to market its button-less iPod shuffle as an entry-level player.



In addition, those same people say that the new nano be priced into the existing nano's pricing tier, carrying relatively the same price points as the current models. The current iPod nano, which shoots video with an included camera, sells for $149 for 8GB of capacity, and $179 for 16GB.



While the new hardware is expected to be announced at the Apple's "special event" scheduled for Wednesday, the sixth-generation iPod nano will not be immediately available for sale, people familiar with the matter say.



A rendering of Apple's anticipated iPod nano refresh shows the screen size compared to a second-gen model.



The new nano is believed to employ a screen that is roughly 3cm-by-3cm, or 1.7 inches diagonally, taking up one entire side of the device. For comparison, the current iPod nano has a screen that measures 2.2 inches diagonally, while the second-generation iPod nano had a screen that was about 3cm by 2.5cm.



Last week, AppleInsider first reported that the new iPod nano would retain Apple's 30-pin iPod dock connector within its drastically reduced form factor. This will allow compatibility with the existing, lucrative iPod accessory ecosystem.







Numerous cases for the new iPod suggest that, in addition to the 30-pin dock connector, the new device will also have external buttons for volume and hold (or lock). The device's headphone jack appears to be located at the bottom, next to the dock connector.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 68
    Maybe a new nano will have a more traditional digital camera look and feel... with a facing screen and opposing camera lens?
  • Reply 2 of 68
    Seems like a re-run of the previous article except for not replacing the Shuffle.
  • Reply 3 of 68
    Something to keep in mind: It will cost twice as much—per ounce.
  • Reply 4 of 68
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Maybe a new nano will have a more traditional digital camera look and feel... with a facing screen and opposing camera lens?



    Thats a good idea.... If it had a nice lens, and better camera sensor i might not mind loosing the widescreen.
  • Reply 5 of 68
    sockrolidsockrolid Posts: 2,788member
    My gut feeling says that the shuffle gets bigger and gets the 3x3 cm touchscreen which doubles as a virtual click wheel. The current shuffle isn't selling well, so adding a screen with coverflow and a click wheel that appears only when needed could help sales.



    I also think the nano will get a touch screen larger than the one it currently has (2.8" vs. the current 2.4" maybe). And its separate click wheel goes away in favor of the virtual click wheel that appears on the screen when needed. So it will have a bigger screen but the overall size will remain roughly the same.



    And, of course, the iPod touch will get all of the iPhone 4's features except for the phone electronics. FaceTime cameras, Retina display, etc. but maybe it will have the traditional curved metal back instead of the glass slab. (And maybe it will come in black or white, and Steve will announce white iPhone 4 and white iPod touch availability...)
  • Reply 6 of 68
    cvaldes1831cvaldes1831 Posts: 1,832member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    The new nano is believed to employ a screen that is roughly 3cm-by-3cm, or 1.7 inches in diameter, taking up one entire side of the device. For comparison, the current iPod nano has a screen that measures 2.2 inches diagonally, while the second-generation iPod nano had a screen that was about 3cm by 2.5cm.



    What the heck kind of paragraph is this? It's atrocious.



    If you want to compare screen sizes, use the same measurements.



    The first device you mention lists the height-and-width followed by the mysterious "diameter" measurement. (What the hell is that?) The second device you mention only have a diagonal screen measurement. The final device lists the approximate height and width dimensions, but no diagonal.
  • Reply 7 of 68
    joe hsjoe hs Posts: 488member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BuzzMega View Post


    Something to keep in mind: It will cost twice as much?per ounce.



    an ounce? that's awfully heavy.
  • Reply 8 of 68
    aizmovaizmov Posts: 987member
    If it has a camera I'll get one.
  • Reply 9 of 68
    Introducing the iPod Pequeno.
  • Reply 10 of 68
    newtronnewtron Posts: 705member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post


    The first device you mention lists the height-and-width followed by the mysterious "diameter" measurement. (What the hell is that?)







    It must be round! You heard it on AI first!
  • Reply 11 of 68
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post


    What the heck kind of paragraph is this? It's atrocious.



    I had no idea the Grammar Police read AppleInsider. Learn something new every day.
  • Reply 12 of 68
    rraburrabu Posts: 239member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post


    What the heck kind of paragraph is this? It's atrocious.



    If you want to compare screen sizes, use the same measurements.



    The first device you mention lists the height-and-width followed by the mysterious "diameter" measurement. (What the hell is that?) The second device you mention only have a diagonal screen measurement. The final device lists the approximate height and width dimensions, but no diagonal.



    Exactly what I was thinking.
  • Reply 13 of 68
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Maybe a new nano will have a more traditional digital camera look and feel... with a facing screen and opposing camera lens?



    That seems awful thin to put the camera HW in and the screen, not to mention very awkward to hold since it would be so small.



    Based on the components and tech I?m aware of, the only way I can see a camera in this device is if it?s on one side. For example, you would look down at the display while the camera is in front of you pointing forward.
  • Reply 14 of 68
    I just cant bite it. This can't be a Nano. it's a shuffle. Doesn't anyone else get it?
  • Reply 15 of 68
    The Shuffle isn't going anywhere.



    People fail to understand that the Shuffle isn't a product, it's a marketing gimmick. It's meant to be given away as door prizes, etc., as a gateway to real Apple products.



    My parents have a drawer full of Shuffles. They now also have an iPhone and a MacBook.
  • Reply 16 of 68
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by striker_kk View Post


    I just cant bite it. This can't be a Nano. it's a shuffle. Doesn't anyone else get it?



    I’m with you. If this is called a Nano —maybe Apple wants the Shuffle to always be associated with no display or a price point — then I think the current Nano styling will have to remain, as well. But I keep thinking this has to be a SuperShuffle, especially with a casing that is similar to the G2 Shuffle and what looks like a space for the clip, something that only the Shuffle has had.
  • Reply 17 of 68
    cmf2cmf2 Posts: 1,427member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by striker_kk View Post


    I just cant bite it. This can't be a Nano. it's a shuffle. Doesn't anyone else get it?



    nano-

    pref.

    1. often nanno- Extremely small: nannoplankton.

    2. One billionth (10-9): nanosecond.



    shuf·fle (shfl)

    v. shuf·fled, shuf·fling, shuf·fles

    v.tr.

    1. To slide (the feet) along the floor or ground while walking.

    2. To move (something) from one place to another; transfer or shift.

    3. To put aside or under cover quickly; shunt: shuffled the bill under a pile of junk mail.

    4. To mix together; jumble.

    5. To mix together (playing cards or tiles, for example) so as to make a random order of arrangement.



    Seems like a simple concept to me. Shuffle doesn't mean small. The nano becoming smaller doesn't make it the shuffle, it actually makes the nano name more appropriate. The shuffle wouldn't be a shuffle if it had full media controls and could do much more than just shuffle songs.



    Furthermore, this nano concept isn't coming out of thin air. Case manufacturers are calling it a nano case, if it was a case for the shuffle they would have called it that.
  • Reply 18 of 68
    These little thing will be extended appleTV remotes... to use apps/play games on the apple tv, buy more to play multiplayer!

  • Reply 19 of 68
    wigginwiggin Posts: 2,258member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by striker_kk View Post


    I just cant bite it. This can't be a Nano. it's a shuffle. Doesn't anyone else get it?



    I agree. Apple can't charge the same price for a device with a smaller screen than the current nano. So they'd either need to lower the price (encroaching on shuffle price points), or this IS the new shuffle.



    I still think Apple is going to jack up the capacity of the nano so they can discontinue the classic and finally rid themselves of the last hard drive iPod. And the only way to do that without a big price increase (due to cost of the flash chips) is to keep the simple, old-school scroll wheel control).
  • Reply 20 of 68
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post


    nano-

    pref.

    1. often nanno- Extremely small: nannoplankton.

    2. One billionth (10-9): nanosecond.



    shuf·fle (shfl)

    v. shuf·fled, shuf·fling, shuf·fles

    v.tr.

    1. To slide (the feet) along the floor or ground while walking.

    2. To move (something) from one place to another; transfer or shift.

    3. To put aside or under cover quickly; shunt: shuffled the bill under a pile of junk mail.

    4. To mix together; jumble.

    5. To mix together (playing cards or tiles, for example) so as to make a random order of arrangement.



    Seems like a simple concept to me. Shuffle doesn't mean small. The nano becoming smaller doesn't make it the shuffle, it actually makes the nano name more appropriate. The shuffle wouldn't be a shuffle if it had full media controls and could do much more than just shuffle songs.



    Furthermore, this nano concept isn't coming out of thin air. Case manufacturers are calling it a nano case, if it was a case for the shuffle they would have called it that.



    I think I see what you?re saying. While it would be more inline with the Shuffle?s physical designs, if the iPod OS allows you to do more than play inline or shuffle the songs, because it has a display, then calling it a Shuffle would not be accurate?



    I can definitely see Apple not calling it a Shuffle for that reason, but I still hold that the current, larger Nano styling would likely still have a place in the lineup.
Sign In or Register to comment.