looks nice, but nothing special probably because i wanted the iTouch to have a camera and undertake video recording. damn you APPLE.
But I still love ya.
The previous rumor that the Touch didn’t get a camera due to technical issues appears to be true. The breakdown of the Touch shows a 6mm x 6mm x 3mm space in the touch that matches the camera dimensions of the Nano.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCJ001
You should learn the names of the Apple products that you discuss:
iPod Touch.
I don’t see the prob with using a truncated name in this type of setting. I will often refer to the entire iPod and iPhone line as iDevice and I don’t recall Apple ever having a product named as such and I’m sure it’s quite well known what is meant. Earlier I used the even simpler Touch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius
That looks like a very bad place to put the camera. It's positioned where someone would naturally be holding the device. I suppose they couldn't fit it at the top where it should be because of the screen, but it really seems like a poor design decision.
Yeah, it’s far from ideal, but I’ve read, “the camera you have is better than the one you don’t.” I hate where the iPhone camera is, too, but i rarely use it so it’s not a big deal to me.
The display and battery dominate that end of the device so I don’t see any way Apple could add a camera to that end without (a) making the case longer, or (b) reducing the size of the battery. The whole camera thing doesn’t entice me but I am impressed at how much they added to the Nano despite keeping it the same, but I can’t imagine it would not have sold just as well if they made it slightly bigger and sold a better camera that can do stills and can is better placed. Of course, we don’t know what is in the pipeline. Perhaps that is for next year’s model.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. X
What about it? I didn't see anything out of place.
The green Nano is the old model. It’s the small display with the larger click wheel and less vibrant anodizing.
Check your Nano’s click wheel through the box before you open it. iLounge has reported that some have a noticeable gap between the click wheel and the case of some of their models. Apparently the new design means that the click wheel is connected from the front now through a twisting action and the connectors appear to not be as well as designed as they could be. iLounge has reported that some have a noticeable gap between the click wheel and the case.
So for those who have actually had a chance to see the new nanos in person, is there something new about the casing?
Apple is marketing the new nanos as having a POLISHED anodized aluminum casing, making it seem like something different from the usual anodized aluminum that has been seen on last year's model as well as the aluminum MacBooks and iMacs.
So am I missing something here? Are the new nanos sporting some slightly smoother or shinier metal? Or is it the same stuff just "re-marketed" as POLISHED anodized aluminum? I actually quite like the matte feeling of Apple's anodzied aluminum products and I wonder what difference, if any, polishing makes to that feeling.
And since Apple seems to have a tradition of standardizing on a few materials and colors for their various products, I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually trot out new MacBooks and iMacs with polished finishes as well.
Most standard anodized products in my experience are brushed. Polished anodized aluminum is pretty rare. When I worked at a bike shop, the only polished anodized aluminum came from Chris King. Chris King supposedly had a patented super-thick anodization process that was also polished. It gave the aluminum an extra hard coat while simultaneously adding a gloss sheen. I wonder if Apple licensed that from them? Or came up with their own method? (more likely)
Based on the angles of the Nano, I don't think glare would be an issue, and if the gloss adds hardness, it should be more scratch resistant than traditional aluminum (a relatively soft metal), while adding aesthetic flare. Often the brushed metal on traditional anodized aluminum hides scratches, and anodization is easily scratched off.
Hope this helps.
I think this gives interesting potential (as you mentioned) to the desktop and laptop lineup! (Can you say, revised MacBook lineup with colors?)
It'll be smoother.....and much more scratch-able. Same with the polished-stainless backs on the other iPods. It's designed to look great when you first buy it, and then look like crap after you've had it for a while, so that you have to 'upgrade' later.
My timing was really poor. I bought the 1st-gen Nano, which was uber-scratchable. I didn't replace it when they had the much more durable anodized finish on the 2nd-gen, because I just didn't need it then. Then came the 3rd-gen (fatty) with the memory capacity I wanted, and Apple went back to the stupid scratchable stainless backing again! I bought one anyway. Again I haven't upgraded to the 4th gen because I don't need it, but it has the better anodized finish. And now in the 5th gen they go back to uber-scratchable.
Gloss anodized may actually be more scratch resistant.
How is it a design necessity? Is it going to cost 900 dollars or something if they move the camera 3 inches north?
Others have mentioned your answer.
1. The screen thickness prohibits the camera being behind it.
2. You may reorient the camera, and the screen view will rotate also.
3. (Not mentioned, I believe) The camera more distal than the microphone is preferable. Blocking the camera gives visual feedback. If the microphone were more distal than the camera, a finger could block the sound without blocking the camera and ruining the video recording.
My main point in the third point is that Apple has thought through the design and worked with the limitations.
looks nice, but nothing special probably because i wanted the iTouch to have a camera and undertake video recording. damn you APPLE.
But I still love ya.
I'm with you. Apple will eventually give the Touch a camera. But I have to thank Apple for giving me the video camera on my iPhone- I got to capture Derek Jeter's history making hit last night and 3 minute standing ovation . Myself and 2 buds with iPhones captured it. An amazing night.
THe video capture on this Nano is just too low quality and too difficult to use (awkward camera location, storage capacity, and monitor size) to make it worthwhile for me. I hope the kiddies enjoy it. A missed opportunity for the Touch IMHO.
So for those who have actually had a chance to see the new nanos in person, is there something new about the casing?
Apple is marketing the new nanos as having a POLISHED anodized aluminum casing, making it seem like something different from the usual anodized aluminum that has been seen on last year's model as well as the aluminum MacBooks and iMacs.
So am I missing something here? Are the new nanos sporting some slightly smoother or shinier metal? Or is it the same stuff just "re-marketed" as POLISHED anodized aluminum? I actually quite like the matte feeling of Apple's anodzied aluminum products and I wonder what difference, if any, polishing makes to that feeling.
And since Apple seems to have a tradition of standardizing on a few materials and colors for their various products, I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually trot out new MacBooks and iMacs with polished finishes as well.
I saw them and preferred the prior matte ones. I've never liked shiny.
That looks like a very bad place to put the camera. It's positioned where someone would naturally be holding the device. I suppose they couldn't fit it at the top where it should be because of the screen, but it really seems like a poor design decision.
It is. I saw videos that people had made in the store of their fingers. I tried making one and also captured my finger. It's awkward and requires you to use 2 hands or extend all your fingers outward.
That really depends on if you are replicating Apple's Marketing/Trademark or trying to comply with the demands of proper grammar. Proper grammar dictates writing, iPod Touch because the name is a proper noun. Look at Wikipedia and other news sources.
Those sources write, "iPod Touch." That is generally what one should do when writing about the iPod Touch. Apple writes, "iPod touch" because that is how it markets/trademarked the name.
This argument is incredibly lame but I can't resist.
Being an English-born English-speaker and a writer educated in England in the English language I can tell you that you are wrong, and the wiki is wrong. Well, perhaps not so much "wrong" as trying to apply 19th and 20th century rules to a modern English language and a global culture that's changed significantly since those rules were written.
First off, even if you were right, *both* "iPod Touch" and "iPod touch" would be correct, because it's completely correct to not capitalise if you actually consider the entire product name to be "iPod touch" vs. it being an "iPod" with the variant "touch." A name is a name, and is spelled the way the holder or originator of the name wants it to be spelled including capitalisation.
Secondly, the idea that because it's a proper noun you need to capitalise the start of each word is as mentioned, something that doesn't really have any relevance in today's world of acronyms-as-names, inter-capitalised names, all lower-case names, and names purposely beginning with lower-case.
Finally, it's just bad form old chap.
If Apple says it's "iPod touch" and that's the full name of the product, it's plain old bloody rude to change it because of some century old stick-up-the-bum rule that really shouldn't apply. Rules change, and the holder of the name is always the best source on authenticity and spelling.
What if I spelled my name "Throat Warbler Mangrove" for instance, but wanted to pronounce it "Luxury Yacht?"
First off, even if you were right, *both* "iPod Touch" and "iPod touch" would be correct, because it's completely correct to not capitalise if you actually consider the entire product name to be "iPod touch" vs. it being an "iPod" with the variant "touch." A name is a name, and is spelled the way the holder or originator of the name wants it to be spelled including capitalisation.
I agree with second part of your comment ?the part I bolded? but not the first pat. To me it reads as if you are contradicting yourself.
The product name is iPod Touch because that is what was chosen by Apple as the product. The show NOVA is spelled with all letters capitalized because that is what was chosen by creators. The same goes for WiMAX which has the letter ?i? lowercase and the remaining letter than spell ?max? capitalized.
None of that means that we can?t make my own shorten versions of the names to speed up writing and reading. The whole point of this forum is to make a point that is clearly understood and no variation of spelling I?ve seen has lessened that ability.
I agree with second part of your comment —the part I bolded— but not the first pat. To me it reads as if you are contradicting yourself.
The product name is iPod Touch because that is what was chosen by Apple as the product. The show NOVA is spelled with all letters capitalized because that is what was chosen by creators. The same goes for WiMAX which has the letter ‘i’ lowercase and the remaining letter than spell ‘max’ capitalized.
None of that means that we can’t make my own shorten versions of the names to speed up writing and reading. The whole point of this forum is to make a point that is clearly understood and no variation of spelling I’ve seen has lessened that ability.
Hey, you're back! I hope you're well. It's not the same here without your in-depth posts.
You should learn the names of the Apple products that you discuss:
iPod Touch.
sorry, iTouch is what everybody outside of apple parlance calls it...cant tell you the number of times someone has said to me, or I have over heard something like "I cant get an iphone because (reason here) but I want an iTouch"...
keeping things short is acceptable, it is no different than someone saying "my pc runs vista premium" rather than "my pc runs Microsoft Windows Vista Home Premium edition"
1. The screen thickness prohibits the camera being behind it.
2. You may reorient the camera, and the screen view will rotate also.
3. (Not mentioned, I believe) The camera more distal than the microphone is preferable. Blocking the camera gives visual feedback. If the microphone were more distal than the camera, a finger could block the sound without blocking the camera and ruining the video recording.
My main point in the third point is that Apple has thought through the design and worked with the limitations.
Funny my phone has a camera behind its screen, and its thin, too.
Funny my phone has a camera behind its screen, and its thin, too.
Great! How thin is it? How much volume does it have? What other components does it have that are taking up space? Is there also a battery taking up the space behind the display? Would Apple sell more if the Nano was twice as thick to put the camera there or if they had to reduce the size of the battery to accommodate the camera at the position you want it?
Comments
Actually, it's iPod touch
But I agree with your statement!
You should learn the names of the Apple products that you discuss:
iPod Touch.
I make a simple mistake ON ONE PRODUCT, looks like we in kindergarden again, so that their contribution to this discussion.
looks nice, but nothing special probably because i wanted the iTouch to have a camera and undertake video recording. damn you APPLE.
But I still love ya.
The previous rumor that the Touch didn’t get a camera due to technical issues appears to be true. The breakdown of the Touch shows a 6mm x 6mm x 3mm space in the touch that matches the camera dimensions of the Nano.
You should learn the names of the Apple products that you discuss:
iPod Touch.
I don’t see the prob with using a truncated name in this type of setting. I will often refer to the entire iPod and iPhone line as iDevice and I don’t recall Apple ever having a product named as such and I’m sure it’s quite well known what is meant. Earlier I used the even simpler Touch.
That looks like a very bad place to put the camera. It's positioned where someone would naturally be holding the device. I suppose they couldn't fit it at the top where it should be because of the screen, but it really seems like a poor design decision.
Yeah, it’s far from ideal, but I’ve read, “the camera you have is better than the one you don’t.” I hate where the iPhone camera is, too, but i rarely use it so it’s not a big deal to me.
The display and battery dominate that end of the device so I don’t see any way Apple could add a camera to that end without (a) making the case longer, or (b) reducing the size of the battery. The whole camera thing doesn’t entice me but I am impressed at how much they added to the Nano despite keeping it the same, but I can’t imagine it would not have sold just as well if they made it slightly bigger and sold a better camera that can do stills and can is better placed. Of course, we don’t know what is in the pipeline. Perhaps that is for next year’s model.
What about it? I didn't see anything out of place.
The green Nano is the old model. It’s the small display with the larger click wheel and less vibrant anodizing.
It's for that extra-smudge effect!
It's probably because video will be shot in a wide screen format of some sort so your viewfinder - the screen - will be in proper orientation
How is it a design necessity? Is it going to cost 900 dollars or something if they move the camera 3 inches north?
"How is it a design necessity?" What? are you kidding?! They put the camera where it could fit. End of story! {"3 inches north"} Yeah, right!
So for those who have actually had a chance to see the new nanos in person, is there something new about the casing?
Apple is marketing the new nanos as having a POLISHED anodized aluminum casing, making it seem like something different from the usual anodized aluminum that has been seen on last year's model as well as the aluminum MacBooks and iMacs.
So am I missing something here? Are the new nanos sporting some slightly smoother or shinier metal? Or is it the same stuff just "re-marketed" as POLISHED anodized aluminum? I actually quite like the matte feeling of Apple's anodzied aluminum products and I wonder what difference, if any, polishing makes to that feeling.
And since Apple seems to have a tradition of standardizing on a few materials and colors for their various products, I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually trot out new MacBooks and iMacs with polished finishes as well.
Most standard anodized products in my experience are brushed. Polished anodized aluminum is pretty rare. When I worked at a bike shop, the only polished anodized aluminum came from Chris King. Chris King supposedly had a patented super-thick anodization process that was also polished. It gave the aluminum an extra hard coat while simultaneously adding a gloss sheen. I wonder if Apple licensed that from them? Or came up with their own method? (more likely)
Based on the angles of the Nano, I don't think glare would be an issue, and if the gloss adds hardness, it should be more scratch resistant than traditional aluminum (a relatively soft metal), while adding aesthetic flare. Often the brushed metal on traditional anodized aluminum hides scratches, and anodization is easily scratched off.
Hope this helps.
I think this gives interesting potential (as you mentioned) to the desktop and laptop lineup! (Can you say, revised MacBook lineup with colors?)
It'll be smoother.....and much more scratch-able.
My timing was really poor. I bought the 1st-gen Nano, which was uber-scratchable. I didn't replace it when they had the much more durable anodized finish on the 2nd-gen, because I just didn't need it then. Then came the 3rd-gen (fatty) with the memory capacity I wanted, and Apple went back to the stupid scratchable stainless backing again! I bought one anyway. Again I haven't upgraded to the 4th gen because I don't need it, but it has the better anodized finish. And now in the 5th gen they go back to uber-scratchable.
Gloss anodized may actually be more scratch resistant.
How is it a design necessity? Is it going to cost 900 dollars or something if they move the camera 3 inches north?
Others have mentioned your answer.
1. The screen thickness prohibits the camera being behind it.
2. You may reorient the camera, and the screen view will rotate also.
3. (Not mentioned, I believe) The camera more distal than the microphone is preferable. Blocking the camera gives visual feedback. If the microphone were more distal than the camera, a finger could block the sound without blocking the camera and ruining the video recording.
My main point in the third point is that Apple has thought through the design and worked with the limitations.
looks nice, but nothing special probably because i wanted the iTouch to have a camera and undertake video recording. damn you APPLE.
But I still love ya.
I'm with you. Apple will eventually give the Touch a camera. But I have to thank Apple for giving me the video camera on my iPhone- I got to capture Derek Jeter's history making hit last night and 3 minute standing ovation . Myself and 2 buds with iPhones captured it. An amazing night.
THe video capture on this Nano is just too low quality and too difficult to use (awkward camera location, storage capacity, and monitor size) to make it worthwhile for me. I hope the kiddies enjoy it. A missed opportunity for the Touch IMHO.
So for those who have actually had a chance to see the new nanos in person, is there something new about the casing?
Apple is marketing the new nanos as having a POLISHED anodized aluminum casing, making it seem like something different from the usual anodized aluminum that has been seen on last year's model as well as the aluminum MacBooks and iMacs.
So am I missing something here? Are the new nanos sporting some slightly smoother or shinier metal? Or is it the same stuff just "re-marketed" as POLISHED anodized aluminum? I actually quite like the matte feeling of Apple's anodzied aluminum products and I wonder what difference, if any, polishing makes to that feeling.
And since Apple seems to have a tradition of standardizing on a few materials and colors for their various products, I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually trot out new MacBooks and iMacs with polished finishes as well.
I saw them and preferred the prior matte ones. I've never liked shiny.
That looks like a very bad place to put the camera. It's positioned where someone would naturally be holding the device. I suppose they couldn't fit it at the top where it should be because of the screen, but it really seems like a poor design decision.
It is. I saw videos that people had made in the store of their fingers. I tried making one and also captured my finger. It's awkward and requires you to use 2 hands or extend all your fingers outward.
You should learn the names of the Apple products that you discuss:
iPod Touch.
Why- are they hallowed?
That really depends on if you are replicating Apple's Marketing/Trademark or trying to comply with the demands of proper grammar. Proper grammar dictates writing, iPod Touch because the name is a proper noun. Look at Wikipedia and other news sources.
Those sources write, "iPod Touch." That is generally what one should do when writing about the iPod Touch. Apple writes, "iPod touch" because that is how it markets/trademarked the name.
This argument is incredibly lame but I can't resist.
Being an English-born English-speaker and a writer educated in England in the English language I can tell you that you are wrong, and the wiki is wrong. Well, perhaps not so much "wrong" as trying to apply 19th and 20th century rules to a modern English language and a global culture that's changed significantly since those rules were written.
First off, even if you were right, *both* "iPod Touch" and "iPod touch" would be correct, because it's completely correct to not capitalise if you actually consider the entire product name to be "iPod touch" vs. it being an "iPod" with the variant "touch." A name is a name, and is spelled the way the holder or originator of the name wants it to be spelled including capitalisation.
Secondly, the idea that because it's a proper noun you need to capitalise the start of each word is as mentioned, something that doesn't really have any relevance in today's world of acronyms-as-names, inter-capitalised names, all lower-case names, and names purposely beginning with lower-case.
Finally, it's just bad form old chap.
If Apple says it's "iPod touch" and that's the full name of the product, it's plain old bloody rude to change it because of some century old stick-up-the-bum rule that really shouldn't apply. Rules change, and the holder of the name is always the best source on authenticity and spelling.
What if I spelled my name "Throat Warbler Mangrove" for instance, but wanted to pronounce it "Luxury Yacht?"
First off, even if you were right, *both* "iPod Touch" and "iPod touch" would be correct, because it's completely correct to not capitalise if you actually consider the entire product name to be "iPod touch" vs. it being an "iPod" with the variant "touch." A name is a name, and is spelled the way the holder or originator of the name wants it to be spelled including capitalisation.
I agree with second part of your comment ?the part I bolded? but not the first pat. To me it reads as if you are contradicting yourself.
The product name is iPod Touch because that is what was chosen by Apple as the product. The show NOVA is spelled with all letters capitalized because that is what was chosen by creators. The same goes for WiMAX which has the letter ?i? lowercase and the remaining letter than spell ?max? capitalized.
None of that means that we can?t make my own shorten versions of the names to speed up writing and reading. The whole point of this forum is to make a point that is clearly understood and no variation of spelling I?ve seen has lessened that ability.
I agree with second part of your comment —the part I bolded— but not the first pat. To me it reads as if you are contradicting yourself.
The product name is iPod Touch because that is what was chosen by Apple as the product. The show NOVA is spelled with all letters capitalized because that is what was chosen by creators. The same goes for WiMAX which has the letter ‘i’ lowercase and the remaining letter than spell ‘max’ capitalized.
None of that means that we can’t make my own shorten versions of the names to speed up writing and reading. The whole point of this forum is to make a point that is clearly understood and no variation of spelling I’ve seen has lessened that ability.
Hey, you're back! I hope you're well. It's not the same here without your in-depth posts.
You should learn the names of the Apple products that you discuss:
iPod Touch.
sorry, iTouch is what everybody outside of apple parlance calls it...cant tell you the number of times someone has said to me, or I have over heard something like "I cant get an iphone because (reason here) but I want an iTouch"...
keeping things short is acceptable, it is no different than someone saying "my pc runs vista premium" rather than "my pc runs Microsoft Windows Vista Home Premium edition"
I make a simple mistake ON ONE PRODUCT, looks like we in kindergarden again, so that their contribution to this discussion.
souliisoul, ignore the forum Nazis!
iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, hehe this is fun, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch
souliisoul, ignore the forum Nazis!
iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, hehe this is fun, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch, iTouch
lets get the nazis really pissed by talking about cool keyboard shortcuts using the clover key in "OS EX" on my new powerbook pro...
I can do this all day, how long till someones head explodes?
Others have mentioned your answer.
1. The screen thickness prohibits the camera being behind it.
2. You may reorient the camera, and the screen view will rotate also.
3. (Not mentioned, I believe) The camera more distal than the microphone is preferable. Blocking the camera gives visual feedback. If the microphone were more distal than the camera, a finger could block the sound without blocking the camera and ruining the video recording.
My main point in the third point is that Apple has thought through the design and worked with the limitations.
Funny my phone has a camera behind its screen, and its thin, too.
Funny my phone has a camera behind its screen, and its thin, too.
Great! How thin is it? How much volume does it have? What other components does it have that are taking up space? Is there also a battery taking up the space behind the display? Would Apple sell more if the Nano was twice as thick to put the camera there or if they had to reduce the size of the battery to accommodate the camera at the position you want it?