Review roundup: iPod lineup impresses, Ping disappoints
The first reviews of Apple's new iPods and Ping music social network have appeared, with favorable impressions of the iPod touch, iPod nano, and iPod shuffle, but generally negative responses to Ping.
Reviewers were enthusiastic about the iPod touch, although they took issue with the still photo resolution of the rear camera, the reduced viewing radius and dimmer display than the iPhone 4, and the lack of GPS or camera flash. Although some reviewers were initially skeptical about the iPod nano, in general, they were positive about the drastic redesign of the device. The iPod shuffle for the most part stayed out of the spotlight, but reporters did welcome the reintroduction of physical buttons.
While responses to the new iPod models were favorable across-the-board, Ping failed to live up to expectations. The general consensus was that Ping had potential, but needed work.
The Wall Street Journal's Katherine Boehret:
In her review titled "The Good, The Bad, and the So So," Boehret highlighted the iPod touch as "remarkably thin" with "beautiful" HD video footage and impressive audio. Ping, on the other hand, she found to be "socially awkward."
"One of Ping's biggest downsides is that it doesn't import lists of friends from other established social networks," wrote Boehret.
Boehret found the iPod nano's redesign "surprising," and particularly enjoyed the integration of touch photo viewing.
USA Today's Edward Baig:
Baig welcomed the iPod touch enhancements that brought it closer to the iPhone 4, but missed notable features from the iPhone, such as GPS, LED flash, and the 5-megapixel camera. The iPod touch is "still a winner," though, and Baig is confident it will remain the most popular iPod.
According to Baig, the iPod nano is "awfully cute," but Apple has "given and taken away." The touchscreen, diminutive size, and clip come at the cost of the video camera.
Ping is the only disappointment out of this batch of products, as it just "isn't quite there." Baig finds the general idea behind Ping appealing, but sees it as "incomplete."
Businessweek's Arik Hesseldahl:
Hesseldahl was "generally impressed" with Apple's changes to the iPod line.
At first, using the smaller touchscreen on the iPod nano "seemed ridiculous" to Hesseldahl, but after use, he found it intuitive. He hardly missed the video playback and video camera features of the the previous generation iPod nano, noting that in this case, it was "stripped down for the better."
The iPod touch "kicked up the intensity about a dozen notches" with its "muscular" A4 processor and Retina display. Hesseldahl found the still photos to be just "fine," and the HD video impressive.
For Hesseldahl, Ping is missing a "key point:" seamless integration of a music-sharing experience with existing social networks such as Facebook and Twitter.
Other reviews
Engadget, Macworld, and Techcrunch have also posted reviews of the new iPod lineup.
Reviewers were enthusiastic about the iPod touch, although they took issue with the still photo resolution of the rear camera, the reduced viewing radius and dimmer display than the iPhone 4, and the lack of GPS or camera flash. Although some reviewers were initially skeptical about the iPod nano, in general, they were positive about the drastic redesign of the device. The iPod shuffle for the most part stayed out of the spotlight, but reporters did welcome the reintroduction of physical buttons.
While responses to the new iPod models were favorable across-the-board, Ping failed to live up to expectations. The general consensus was that Ping had potential, but needed work.
The Wall Street Journal's Katherine Boehret:
In her review titled "The Good, The Bad, and the So So," Boehret highlighted the iPod touch as "remarkably thin" with "beautiful" HD video footage and impressive audio. Ping, on the other hand, she found to be "socially awkward."
"One of Ping's biggest downsides is that it doesn't import lists of friends from other established social networks," wrote Boehret.
Boehret found the iPod nano's redesign "surprising," and particularly enjoyed the integration of touch photo viewing.
USA Today's Edward Baig:
Baig welcomed the iPod touch enhancements that brought it closer to the iPhone 4, but missed notable features from the iPhone, such as GPS, LED flash, and the 5-megapixel camera. The iPod touch is "still a winner," though, and Baig is confident it will remain the most popular iPod.
According to Baig, the iPod nano is "awfully cute," but Apple has "given and taken away." The touchscreen, diminutive size, and clip come at the cost of the video camera.
Ping is the only disappointment out of this batch of products, as it just "isn't quite there." Baig finds the general idea behind Ping appealing, but sees it as "incomplete."
Businessweek's Arik Hesseldahl:
Hesseldahl was "generally impressed" with Apple's changes to the iPod line.
At first, using the smaller touchscreen on the iPod nano "seemed ridiculous" to Hesseldahl, but after use, he found it intuitive. He hardly missed the video playback and video camera features of the the previous generation iPod nano, noting that in this case, it was "stripped down for the better."
The iPod touch "kicked up the intensity about a dozen notches" with its "muscular" A4 processor and Retina display. Hesseldahl found the still photos to be just "fine," and the HD video impressive.
For Hesseldahl, Ping is missing a "key point:" seamless integration of a music-sharing experience with existing social networks such as Facebook and Twitter.
Other reviews
Engadget, Macworld, and Techcrunch have also posted reviews of the new iPod lineup.
Comments
I find it interesting the contrast between Engadget's solid praise of the new nano and PCMag's very critical review. 2 and a half stars is extremely low, even if one doesn't appreciate the changes for one's own use.
I too fiind it quite disappointing that Apple chose to eliminate more than 50% of the features of the 5th generation (e.g. video capture/playback, contacts, games, etc.) all just to reduce the display to a mere 1.54 inches (what is this 2005?) and incorporate multi-touch capabilities that answers a question no one ever asked of any previous Apple Nano.
Much as the 3rd generation was a serious misstep for its awkward form-factor, this one fails to equal its predecessor in any practical way, yet it's the same price - Not Good.
I too fiind it quite disappointing that Apple chose to eliminate more than 50% of the features of the 5th generation (e.g. video capture/playback, contacts, games, etc.) all just to reduce the display to a mere 1.54 inches (what is this 2005?) and incorporate multi-touch capabilities that answers a question no one ever asked of any previous Apple Nano.
Maybe Apple has found that the people who want "video capture/playback, contacts, games, etc" on their iPods buy the iPod touch / iPhone, whilst the modern iPod nano customer is pretty much only interested in playing music.
Maybe Apple has found that the people who want "video capture/playback, contacts, games, etc" on their iPods buy the iPod touch / iPhone, whilst the modern iPod nano customer is pretty much only interested in playing music.
I think that might be right.
There is an interesting review of the Nano over at macworld.com at the moment, questioning why the screen needs to be as small as it is which I've wondered about. Personally I think a screen about the size of the old Nano would probably have made more sense, though I'll be interested to see it in the flesh.
I think that might be right.
There is an interesting review of the Nano over at macworld.com at the moment, questioning why the screen needs to be as small as it is which I've wondered about. Personally I think a screen about the size of the old Nano would probably have made more sense, though I'll be interested to see it in the flesh.
I can understand that line of thinking as there's that completely unnecessary (proportionally) thick border surrounding the Nano 6th's display that could have very easily afforded a larger touchscreen.
The Nano 6th is certainly looking to be the most polarizing of the iPod 2010 series.
The Nano 6th is certainly looking to be the most polarizing of the iPod 2010 series.
You're absolutely right, and that's one of the reasons why I'm keen to see it in the flesh.
I loved the fat nano, but everyone else seemed to hate it!
Edit: the new one might make a great watch... Too bad Apple hasn't adopted Kleer technology, yet.
Garbage... complete garbage. GUI is screwy and remarkably un-Apple like.
The nail in the coffin is that it only works with music you have purchased from iTunes... not content in your iTunes library.
Blech... worst feature ever!
The iPod Nano is very cute. With FM radio and NIKE+ it's perfect. Too bad the base model is a little bit expensive. If it's $99 I'll buy 3 for all my nieces. As thing stands I'll buy one, 8GB model, for my wife (maybe a pink one since "Pink" is her nickname).
Apple doesn't file for a trademark on Ping unless is plans to expand heavily on the service(s).
I had ping installed for all of 2 min.
Garbage... complete garbage. GUI is screwy and remarkably un-Apple like.
The nail in the coffin is that it only works with music you have purchased from iTunes... not content in your iTunes library.
Blech... worst feature ever!
The problem with doing it otherwise would be:
1. It would be really easy to spot illegal downloaders via Ping, as law enforcement agencies would just need to look for the people with over 20000 songs in their iTunes libraries. Chances are, those folks would neither have purchased all of those songs, nor have physical CDs in their homes to back up that they're not all stolen.
2. People who buy music in iTunes are stuck using the name on their Credit Card in their Ping profiles.
3. After a couple people get busted by the FBI via Ping for stealing music, it would lose all hope as ever being a commonly used service.
4. All social networks rely on marketshare to be viable. If Ping is the 9th most popular network, it might as well not exist.
Anyways, who wants to open iTunes just to check their messages, anyways?
I think everything apple does is terrific.
Best thing you've said since you joined. Well done!
The problem with doing it otherwise would be:
1. It would be really easy to spot illegal downloaders via Ping, as law enforcement agencies would just need to look for the people with over 20000 songs in their iTunes libraries. Chances are, those folks would neither have purchased all of those songs, nor have physical CDs in their homes to back up that they're not all stolen.
At the moment, Ping is a poor man's last.fm and no-one has ever been prosecuted for having a massive last.fm song library.
I agree that Ping doesn't feel like an Apple product. Has it been written by the Lala team?
At the moment, Ping is a poor man's last.fm and no-one has ever been prosecuted for having a massive last.fm song library.
I agree that Ping doesn't feel like an Apple product. Has it been written by the Lala team?
Except that last.fm only show what's been played, and you can configure how long you want the history to show. A heavy BitTorrent thief might have 100 GB of stolen music on their computer, but Last.FM would probably only show a couple hundred hours worth of playlists - not enough to easily spot thieves.
Ping basically discloses everything in the user's iTunes library, even if you haven't pushed play since you agreed to the Ping user agreement (which basically allows Apple to sell your itemized iTunes purchase history, and the address linked to you credit card to advertisers, btw); at least what's been purchased. If that was expanded to include non-iTunes purchases, it would be very easy to spot the thieves, which would basically end up in Ping being avoided by pretty much everyone who's ever illegally copied a friend's CD, downloaded illegally. (that is, everyone with a computer).