# iPod nano



## kainjow (Sep 7, 2005)

From MacWorld:


> After summarizing the existing iPod product line, Jobs explained that the iPod mini is what all of Apple's competitors are aiming for. Apple is "going to do something pretty bold," he said. Apple is "replacing it with something new."
> 
> Jobs calls the iPod nano "an entirely new ground-up design, that also has 1000 songs in your pocket." The white device features a color display and can support photos, uses a grey click wheel to navigate, and is 80 percent smaller in volume than the original iPod -- thinner than a number two pencil, said Jobs. The iPod nano weighs 1.5 ounces or 42 grams
> 
> ...


Photo

So I guess Kevin Rose was right all along...


----------



## Gig' (Sep 7, 2005)

can't wait to see it for real 

funny name though sounds like dwarf in Italian


----------



## kainjow (Sep 7, 2005)

http://flickr.com/photos/ipodlounger/41202369/in/photostream/ - that's thin


----------



## steven_lufc (Sep 7, 2005)

The store is back up now for a proper look.

Aren't those price points the same as the mini? Same price, but less storage.


----------



## chevy (Sep 7, 2005)

I told that the main advantage of changing the HD for Flash on the mini will give the possibility to reduce its size and weight ! 

Here it is !


----------



## kainjow (Sep 7, 2005)

Charge time is less then any other iPod: 3 hours

It also only mentions USB for connectivity - have they dropped full support for FireWire in this model?

Battery life doesn't look to be any better. Only 14 hours, compared to 15 for the normal iPods, and 12 for the shuffle.

It weights only 2x more then a shuffle - impressive


----------



## ora (Sep 7, 2005)

I have to admit, its a very pretty item, but i have a concern. I was talking to a comp sci friend of mine, and he said that the disadvantage of flash drives was that they had a limited number of write cycles per unit, so wouldn't last as long as hd based solutions. Anyone else know about this?

I'm also amazed that these have replaced the mini, here in switzerland, non-apple stores nearby have only just got the 6gb mini in (which i have been very tempted by). Seems a quick product lifecycle, but they did say they were "doing something pretty bold"...


----------



## Gig' (Sep 7, 2005)

kainjow said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> It also only mentions USB for connectivity - have they dropped full support for FireWire in this model?
> 
> ...




AFAIK usb 2.0 more common with wintel inside I...t outside crowd so make sense commercially to have a connection that is as widespread as possible


----------



## kainjow (Sep 7, 2005)

Well, it uses the dock connector, and all other iPods up until now that used the dock connector supported both USB 2 and FW cables, so I'm just wondering if the nano will support FireWire cables or not... I guess we'll just have to wait and see.


----------



## chevy (Sep 7, 2005)

ora said:
			
		

> I have to admit, its a very pretty item, but i have a concern. I was talking to a comp sci friend of mine, and he said that the disadvantage of flash drives was that they had a limited number of write cycles per unit, so wouldn't last as long as hd based solutions. Anyone else know about this?
> 
> I'm also amazed that these have replaced the mini, here in switzerland, non-apple stores nearby have only just got the 6gb mini in (which i have been very tempted by). Seems a quick product lifecycle, but they did say they were "doing something pretty bold"...



Most Flash devices are rated 100'000 write/erase cycles. That's a lot of changes !!! If you load your iPod 10 times per day, it has a duration of 30 years. No bad.


----------



## ora (Sep 7, 2005)

Cheers chevy, thats good news, i guess my friend must have been wrong, or out of date at least.


----------



## serpicolugnut (Sep 7, 2005)

Love the nano. Gonna get one as soon as the wife lets me. On another note...

Does Apple even use their own web browser? Decide for yourself:

http://theodorelee.com/blog/?p=22


----------



## fryke (Sep 7, 2005)

Well, I might get one. Although I must say it means "pay more for less space". It seems like Apple's on a roll here. First they drop the 30 GB model and introduce a 20 GB model for the iPod photo (next they'll drop the 60 GB for a 40? ...), now they drop the 6 GB model for a 2 GB one or something like that. It seems to me they're walking in circles or even worse: Innovating their way back down. Sure: It's small, sexy, everything. But 4 GB tops means I've gotta get rid of 2/3's of my music collection. :/


----------



## kainjow (Sep 7, 2005)

If the nano has all the features of the iPod photos, then the photos' only feature now is size and video out, correct? So there's got to be some newer iPods coming at the Apple Expo in Paris.....


----------



## fryke (Sep 7, 2005)

Not necessarily. 60 GB is one hellufa feature, I'd say.


----------



## Captain Code (Sep 7, 2005)

No syncing with Firewire   

I don't see why not.  They have cables with a dock connector that splits to USB 2.0 and Firewire, so why only support syncing on USB???

That's dumb.


----------



## symphonix (Sep 7, 2005)

I had not noticed that. The iPod nano connects by USB, and not Firewire. I guess they had to keep the size down.


----------



## Captain Code (Sep 7, 2005)

symphonix said:
			
		

> I had not noticed that. The iPod nano connects by USB, and not Firewire. I guess they had to keep the size down.



Macworld says you can charge it over Firewire but not sync it, but Apple's website does not say this.  

http://playlistmag.com/features/2005/09/ipodnanofirst/index.php


----------



## Porce (Sep 7, 2005)

I don't like how the earphone jack is at the bottom...

Anyway, I think I'll stick with my mini for now.  If I wanted a new iPod, I'd get more space, not less.


----------



## RGrphc2 (Sep 7, 2005)

Porce said:
			
		

> I don't like how the earphone jack is at the bottom...
> 
> Anyway, I think I'll stick with my mini for now.  If I wanted a new iPod, I'd get more space, not less.



i'd rather spend the $249 on a 6 GB Mini w/ a Color Screen, when the Original Mini came out all the other music players came out with a 5 GB Mini model at the same price to compete, and now with only a 2 and 4 GB Nano to compete with the the Mini's competition, granted the size is thin and everything but that's the only thing it's got.


----------



## texanpenguin (Sep 8, 2005)

I'm not impressed, but equally not unimpressed.

It's just kinda "meh". Do like the TV ad though.


The main reason for not providing FW syncing is that it means the iPod wouldn't need a FW controller chip in the device. One more thing to eliminate I suppose. Charging is nothing: that's already accounted for in the conversion to the Dock Connector (just routes the two powered pins of the FW plug to the correct part of the connector).

It's a shame, but it's logical.



I just don't think Apple realise how much the weight of an object gives it worth to some people. I've always felt that the iPod mini felt like it was worth the money you invested in it because it felt like quality. This all-plastic thing they've got going on doesn't exactly encourage the same associations.

I wish they'd merely supplemented the iPod mini 6GB with these two iPod nano models.



And I'm not upgrading to iTunes 5 until the iPod software is updated for everyone.


----------



## sirstaunch (Sep 8, 2005)

Closer look here


----------



## RyanLang (Sep 8, 2005)

Is the center button on the clickwheel a touch-sensative button?


----------



## lilbandit (Sep 8, 2005)

I'll probably get one, I love cross country running and it looks to be ideal, tiny, slim, light, long battery life, stopwatch...


----------



## evildan (Sep 8, 2005)

I am/was quit impressed by the nano. A while ago my 30 gig iPod took a nose-dive off of my desk while I was playing it... it crashed to the floor and made a big thump noise. Needless to say, the iPod no longer plays properly.

I was waiting to hear what Apple was going to do to the iPod lineup before I bought another iPod. I've been "getting by" with my iPod Shuffle for a couple of months.

I really miss playing the iPod in my car most of all.

The release of the iPod Nano has got me utterly confused about what I should do. I would really enjoy the Nano - but is it enough space for me and will Griffin release an iTrip for the Nano? These are two very big questions for me.

I have tons of music, but I can honestly say, with a little music management, I could probably get by with 1,000 songs... hmm I don't know.


----------



## fryke (Sep 8, 2005)

I would buy your old iTrip...


----------



## sirstaunch (Sep 8, 2005)

Getting good reviews


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Sep 9, 2005)

to all the naysayers, this is nothing but good news.  i always thought 6gb was a bit of a bad product. it's not that much more gain. people buy the mini because it's the cheapest way to get a clickwheel.  i know about 6 people who all bought 2nd gen minis and they all bought the 4gb, becuase it was cheaper.  i'm gonna get a 2gb to replace my shuffle.

the advantage isn't just size and weight (which, you forget, is a _massive_ deal. this is real progress), but that it's not the smallest jukebox player, it's the most spacious _flash _player. flash is incredible, hard drives really aren't, they just have a big capacity.  no moving parts really is the way to go for a portable device. an ipod you can drop. a lot. no more cradling.  it can only get better.

4 years down the line, i hope all ipods are flash.


----------



## Gig' (Sep 9, 2005)

kainjow said:
			
		

> Well, it uses the dock connector, and all other iPods up until now that used the dock connector supported both USB 2 and FW cables, so I'm just wondering if the nano will support FireWire cables or not... I guess we'll just have to wait and see.




Looks like FW is being abolished ...

http://www.thinksecret.com/archives/nano/source/12.html


----------

