iPhone nano rumors resurface alongside case renderings
Reply 41 of 46
December 16, 2008 8:55AM
The screen size has the same proportions as the existing iPhone screens: 1.5 times as tall as it is wide. It could have the same pixel dimensions with higher density.
The top isn't shown, so you cannot see that there is or is not a hole for the headphone jack.
Reply 42 of 46
December 16, 2008 10:49AM
Originally Posted by
Well it might be that you get to keep some of your iPod customers who are, increasingly, moving their media to cell phones.
Anecdotally perhaps. But the only multimedia phone release that's coincided with a change in iPod growth is the iPhone. And what indication does anyone have that the current iPhone is unacceptable due solely to
? It's never going to fit into a ladies evening bag, so that's right out. what's left?
As far as I can tell, the call for a nano has been from people that A: assume smaller == cheaper (not always true, particularly if you're not willing to compromise on specs) and B: assume that since everyone else does it, it must be the right move.
the iPhone will certainly get smaller -- fat will get trimmed, but the screen size is not going to change. Apple isn't going to convince everyone how great it is to have a smart-phone and then go after the feature-averse low-margin category.
Reply 43 of 46
December 16, 2008 1:10PM
I don't get why people keep going nuts over the notion of an iPhone nano - are we all really THAT desperate for something NEW from Apple?! Simple logic dictates that, given it's slab-like form factor, you can't make the phone much smaller than it already is and still have it function as a phone!
An iPhone 1/5 smaller than the existing model is a gigantic "huh?"
Reply 44 of 46
December 23, 2008 12:13AM
I agree with the general consensus that an iPhone "Nano" would be a mistake, but perhaps the case renderings aren't clear enough, perhaps this "iPhone Nano" is a clamshell device?
Yes I'm reaching, and yes I hope this is completely fake, unless it's for verizon of course. I'm stuck on verizon for another year, and the iPod Touch will have to do for now. Anyway, this is either a clamshell or it's a fake.
Reply 45 of 46
December 23, 2008 3:03AM
Actually, I think it'd make quite some sense. It's about the umbrella. You don't want competitors to thrive under your umbrella, so you create devices that are less expensive but feature most of the stuff of the "real" device.
The small size _obviously_ is no problem for kids and teens, which also just might be the market it's aimed at. And: *I* would want one. The only real problem I see is battery life.
Reply 46 of 46
December 23, 2008 3:36AM
didn't the release of the first smaller iPods (I believe the mini) also cause this kind of rumour? the total storage capacity decreased and "o my god" how could they do that.
and how about the thought that the nano isn't just the new 3rd generation iPhone instead of a new line. which corresponds with Job's remark
"I wasn't alive then, but from everything I've heard, Babe Ruth only had one home run," he quipped. "He just kept hitting it over and over again."
o and by the way, who gives a damn about 3g if wimax is knocking at the door?