Apple announces new iPod nano with multi-touch display

2456

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 117
    r00fusr00fus Posts: 245member
    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.



    You pause like you do on the shuffle, ipod touch, and iphone today: you click your earbud button once. Double-click to skip, Triple click to go back.



    This interface is good enough for runners. I use a shuffle or iPhone on my run, and they both work fine (iphone w/ bluetooth on treadmill, shuffle when I hit the park or pavement).



    My big beef with the new Nano is that there was no mention of App Store support... that would make it killer and rejuvenate a whole new category of Apps. I'm hoping I'm wrong and it is there, or coming soon, but iOS w/o App Store is not that appealing.
  • Reply 22 of 117
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,408member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by daylove22 View Post


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



    I've been on runs and used the camera... it is indeed useful. Video I haven't ever used though. I can live without that. I'll be buying the previous gen nano. This one is a joke for runners. You need mechanical buttons while you're running, not touch screen.
  • Reply 23 of 117
    The square screen is a deal killer for me. Did you see the photo demo? It cuts off the sides of the pic and ruins the entire composition.



    And videos? Nope. Not on a square screen. Not for me.
  • Reply 24 of 117
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,408member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by r00fus View Post


    You pause like you do on the shuffle, ipod touch, and iphone today: you click your earbud button once. Double-click to skip, Triple click to go back.



    No. Apple earbuds do not stay in anyone's ears I know that runs more than a mile. They are garbage, so how am I supposed to pause without using APPLE's earbuds?
  • Reply 25 of 117
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by appleinsider View Post


    it will be available in six colors, $149 for the 8gb model, and $169 for the 16gb model.



    16gb = $179.
  • Reply 26 of 117
    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.
  • Reply 27 of 117
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by emig647 View Post


    No. Apple earbuds do not stay in anyone's ears I know that runs more than a mile. They are garbage, so how am I supposed to pause without using APPLE's earbuds?





    http://store.apple.com/us/product/TW952VC/A



    I bought one. it works with other buds and headphones
  • Reply 28 of 117
    No question this is more of a shuffle on steroids than a real nano replacement. Which would be OK if this was more in the shuffle price range than the nano.



    I see nano sales going way down from the previous generation. But at this point the big seller is the touch anyway (which is killer, although I wish the price had dropped a bit). Many people formerly in the Nano demographic will pass on this...but they'll probably consider a touch instead. Which is exactly what apple wants anyway.



    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.
  • Reply 29 of 117
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post


    No Video, No camera? WTF?



    Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot!?
  • Reply 30 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.



    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.
  • Reply 31 of 117
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member
    I like the Nano Ad! That song reminds me of Keri Russell in Waitress.



    I wonder if the screen stays on long after you've finished touching it? It could be like a little ad pinned to your clothes of what you're listening to, to start conversations with people about the song.
  • Reply 32 of 117
    wonderwonder Posts: 229member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SaltWater View Post


    For that money I can buy a cell phone that gives me so much more!!!



    So go buy one, who is forcing you to buy an iPod Nano?
  • Reply 33 of 117
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,408member
    I just bought the 5th gen ipod nano in blue refurb from apple. $149 for 16gb. I get a camera, play video, record video, keep the click wheel, get a pedometer, bigger screen, and spend less. I am one of the few people I guess that just isn't a big touch screen fan. Oh yah! I can actually control this one with 1 hand... . That was the first thing I noticed jobs doing while controling it, using two hands because it was two small to hold and use the thumb.



    Edit: and oh! longer battery life. 24 hour music playback.
  • Reply 34 of 117
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,408member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    http://store.apple.com/us/product/TW952VC/A



    I bought one. it works with other buds and headphones



    While that made me reconsider for 1/2 a second... the reviews on that thing SUCK.
  • Reply 35 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.



    Very true. And, $149 for an Apple watch (that can also play music and do a few other things that watches normally cannot) does not seem like a bad deal at all.



    I think Apple should advertise and sell it as such. I will ask for this iWatch from my kids for Christmas.
  • Reply 36 of 117
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post


    ... It could be like a little ad pinned to your clothes of what you're listening to, to start conversations with people about the song.



    The whole point of having the white earbuds in my ears is so I don't have to converse with anyone
  • Reply 37 of 117
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,217moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post


    No Video, No camera? WTF?



    When the keynote showed the click-wheel getting sliced, I thought, yeah that's what I'd do:



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=112606



    but then came the square just like iPod fatty did.



    To be honest, video was largely unwatchable on the Nano anyway but I think the 4cm x 6cm display I described in the above link with 6 icons would have been better as you could run App Store apps. Mainly data apps for facebook etc (it would need wifi obviously). It would be too slow for most apps but the tall display would just make scrolling easier and allow one-handed use as well as video playback. You can't really use the square with one hand unless you attach it to something.



    I also think there are too many similarities between the Nano and Shuffle now. They should just have ditched one of them. I suppose for volume they want to hit that low entry point and it would leave a gap but it looks like they don't really know what to do with the low-end: square screen, tall screen, fat screen, back to square screen, buttons, no buttons, back to buttons. Just a mess really.



    They did well with the iPod Touch although I really don't like how they keep making the edges so thin. It's very awkward to hold when taking a picture because it slips out your hand. Besides that, the Touch has nice improvements.
  • Reply 38 of 117
    Needs App Store compatibility via tethering, and where's the camera now? Should have also added HD Radio...
  • Reply 39 of 117
    mj1970mj1970 Posts: 9,002member
    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).
  • Reply 40 of 117
    Might want to snag an "old" nano, Video capability and camera
Sign In or Register to comment.