It seems much more likely that Apple just re-skinned the old iPod software and added a few things like touch support then get iOS working on this thing. iOS is overkill anyway for a device with no need for a TCP/IP stack.
Also the apple website makes no mention of iOS for the nano.
It seems much more likely that Apple just re-skinned the old iPod software and added a few things like touch support then get iOS working on this thing. iOS is overkill anyway for a device with no need for a TCP/IP stack.
Probably. It could evolve some more iOS-like features. But you've probably nailed this.
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).
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.
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).
My guess is that the slightly extended side areas serve the same purpose as the iPad bezel-- to make spurious touch events less likely (since you have to grasp that edge to lever the clip).
So the wider side case area is functional and the smaller top and bottom area is because Apple makes everything as small as humanly possible, and that trumped symmetry.
It seems much more likely that Apple just re-skinned the old iPod software and added a few things like touch support then get iOS working on this thing. iOS is overkill anyway for a device with no need for a TCP/IP stack.
Also the apple website makes no mention of iOS for the nano.
It all depends on what you consider iOS, however. Since it's all the OS X codebase, plus Cocoa Touch minus unneeded I/O stuff (very roughly speaking) arguably any device that sports some subset of the Cocoa Touch API on top of OS X underpinnings (however truncated) is "iOS."
This is indeed overkill for a device like the Nano, but I could see Apple wanting to move as much stuff as possible over to that neck of the woods, even if in a highly minimized version.
Seems like an odd detail to have overlooked (for Apple).
From the photos the left-right sides appear to be radiused, not square corners like the top and bottom. The real thing probably looks perfectly well proportioned.
Apple's attention to detail borders on the pathologically obsessive (as I'm sure you're aware). I don't believe this is something they would have overlooked.
Thank goodness I have a 5th Generation iPod Nano. My fingers are too big to use this thing. Just because you can make something smaller doesn't necessarily mean it will be a better device.
When jobs was launching this he had the pic of the Old Long nano. Then the clickwheel drove away. They should have kept it like that. No need to make it square, just keep the same sized display as the now old nano.
I don't think we need two shuffles, which is basically what we've got now. I think the new nano will do the worst of the three updated iPods. Shuffle will probably improve the most in terms of sales.
No question this is more of a shuffle on steroids than a real nano replacement...
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.
I agree.
This just seems like a Had-To-Do-Something style makeover for the Nano.
I liked the Nano tall, and the square, and sort of like/disliked the last tall-but-curved (so that it rocked when trying to use it laying flat).
Pulling off the control wheel/buttons and larger screen seem like intentional feature removal to steer people away from it.
All the while with a forced smile and saying 'isn't this new one cooler and better'.
I won't keep ranting on the 6th Generation Nano's features and form factor or the fact that you get less for your money than the previous generation. And I won't even rant that the new model appears to be a solution in search of a problem.
However, I think the new Nano will be a lackluster seller, but it very well may significantally canibalize sales of the Shuffle. If I really wanted the Shuffle's size, I would go for the Nano instead.
Finally, if you ever had a desire to own a 5th Generation Nano, especially a 16GB model, this would be the time to buy it, because I suspect there will be a run on them.
However, I think the new Nano will be a lackluster seller, but it very well may significantally canibalize sales of the Shuffle. If I really wanted the Shuffle's size, I would go for the Nano instead.
This is pretty much the exact device that I wanted. I don?t care what it?s called, I wanted a clip on iPod with Nike+. I?ll be getting a blue one on day one, unless that colour is gone then I?ll get whatever colour they have available.
This just seems like a Had-To-Do-Something style makeover for the Nano.
I liked the Nano tall, and the square, and sort of like/disliked the last tall-but-curved (so that it rocked when trying to use it laying flat).
Pulling off the control wheel/buttons and larger screen seem like intentional feature removal to steer people away from it.
All the while with a forced smile and saying 'isn't this new one cooler and better'.
Dumb move Apple on the Nano.
Sad.
By giving consumers a taste of multi-touch with the nano, they may spend the extra few bucks to get the iPod touch entry model instead. The lack of FM radio on the touch is a downer, but access to apps and the iTunes store is a major plus.
Comments
It's a music player...we do not need a camera on it.
Oh! Steve forgot that last Sept. ?
16gb = $179.
you know what you can also get for 200 bucks? an xbox 360, a wii, or 2/3rds of a ps3.
Also the apple website makes no mention of iOS for the nano.
It seems much more likely that Apple just re-skinned the old iPod software and added a few things like touch support then get iOS working on this thing. iOS is overkill anyway for a device with no need for a TCP/IP stack.
Probably. It could evolve some more iOS-like features. But you've probably nailed this.
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).
that's very true.
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.
What an absolutely class piece of design, I really like this. Well done Apple.
Be gone troll
You got it, but now give me a nice, thin band so I can wear this with regular clothes, not just a Jersey Shore Adidas track suit.
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).
My guess is that the slightly extended side areas serve the same purpose as the iPad bezel-- to make spurious touch events less likely (since you have to grasp that edge to lever the clip).
So the wider side case area is functional and the smaller top and bottom area is because Apple makes everything as small as humanly possible, and that trumped symmetry.
It seems much more likely that Apple just re-skinned the old iPod software and added a few things like touch support then get iOS working on this thing. iOS is overkill anyway for a device with no need for a TCP/IP stack.
Also the apple website makes no mention of iOS for the nano.
It all depends on what you consider iOS, however. Since it's all the OS X codebase, plus Cocoa Touch minus unneeded I/O stuff (very roughly speaking) arguably any device that sports some subset of the Cocoa Touch API on top of OS X underpinnings (however truncated) is "iOS."
This is indeed overkill for a device like the Nano, but I could see Apple wanting to move as much stuff as possible over to that neck of the woods, even if in a highly minimized version.
Seems like an odd detail to have overlooked (for Apple).
From the photos the left-right sides appear to be radiused, not square corners like the top and bottom. The real thing probably looks perfectly well proportioned.
Apple's attention to detail borders on the pathologically obsessive (as I'm sure you're aware). I don't believe this is something they would have overlooked.
I don't think we need two shuffles, which is basically what we've got now. I think the new nano will do the worst of the three updated iPods. Shuffle will probably improve the most in terms of sales.
No question this is more of a shuffle on steroids than a real nano replacement...
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.
I agree.
This just seems like a Had-To-Do-Something style makeover for the Nano.
I liked the Nano tall, and the square, and sort of like/disliked the last tall-but-curved (so that it rocked when trying to use it laying flat).
Pulling off the control wheel/buttons and larger screen seem like intentional feature removal to steer people away from it.
All the while with a forced smile and saying 'isn't this new one cooler and better'.
Dumb move Apple on the Nano.
Sad.
However, I think the new Nano will be a lackluster seller, but it very well may significantally canibalize sales of the Shuffle. If I really wanted the Shuffle's size, I would go for the Nano instead.
Finally, if you ever had a desire to own a 5th Generation Nano, especially a 16GB model, this would be the time to buy it, because I suspect there will be a run on them.
However, I think the new Nano will be a lackluster seller, but it very well may significantally canibalize sales of the Shuffle. If I really wanted the Shuffle's size, I would go for the Nano instead.
This is pretty much the exact device that I wanted. I don?t care what it?s called, I wanted a clip on iPod with Nike+. I?ll be getting a blue one on day one, unless that colour is gone then I?ll get whatever colour they have available.
That's me in the last photo!
I agree.
This just seems like a Had-To-Do-Something style makeover for the Nano.
I liked the Nano tall, and the square, and sort of like/disliked the last tall-but-curved (so that it rocked when trying to use it laying flat).
Pulling off the control wheel/buttons and larger screen seem like intentional feature removal to steer people away from it.
All the while with a forced smile and saying 'isn't this new one cooler and better'.
Dumb move Apple on the Nano.
Sad.
By giving consumers a taste of multi-touch with the nano, they may spend the extra few bucks to get the iPod touch entry model instead. The lack of FM radio on the touch is a downer, but access to apps and the iTunes store is a major plus.