Apple announces new iPod nano with multi-touch display

1246

Comments

  • Reply 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).
  • Reply 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!
  • Reply 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.
  • Reply 64 of 117
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,017member
    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?
  • Reply 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.
  • Reply 66 of 117
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 1,917member
    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.
  • Reply 67 of 117
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    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.
  • Reply 68 of 117
    jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    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.
  • Reply 69 of 117
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,017member
    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.
  • Reply 70 of 117
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,298member
    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.
  • Reply 71 of 117
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,408member
    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.
  • Reply 72 of 117
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    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.
  • Reply 73 of 117
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,408member
    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 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.



    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?
  • Reply 74 of 117
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    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. I?ve 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 it?s all the other aspects of the design i like compared to other brands of tried.
  • Reply 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? :-)))
  • Reply 76 of 117
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,408member
    Lol
  • Reply 77 of 117
    quillzquillz Posts: 209member
    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
  • Reply 78 of 117
    wonderwonder Posts: 229member
    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!
  • Reply 79 of 117
    wonderwonder Posts: 229member
    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?
  • Reply 80 of 117
    wonderwonder Posts: 229member
    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 :-)
Sign In or Register to comment.