Are You Disappointed With The New iPod nano?

[Peterson8765]

The new nano that just came out may look pretty nice with all of its colors and its flashy looks, but what it all comes down to is features and performance. The new nano 6G in my eyes basically downgrades what a great product the nano 5G was. The nano 6G doesn't have any real improved or new features except for a different User Interface and a tiny 1.54" multi-touch display. It excludes the video camera, the much bigger 2.2" display, the tactile support of a click wheel which many loved, a microphone, a speaker, cover flow, an alarm clock, and of course the awesome nano design and 9 colors. Apple as well thinks they can get away with it costing the same $149 for an 8GB model and $179 for a 16GB model, is just plain ridiculous. What do you guys think of this new nano?

[CristobalHuet]

I don't think it's a "downgrade"...

- Video camera was useless and terrible quality (640x480 IIRC). No loss here. You couldn't even take pictures with it, never mind the horrid resolution.
- 2.2 vs 1.54 is not a big deal, in fact, are you bringing this up because you honestly watched movies on that screen? :p
- Tacticle clickwheel support is subjective. I'm a fan of touch interfaces so this is awesome for me, you might disagree, but this isn't a downgrade as much as it is a change, which some will like, and some will dislike. You still have external volume controls, which is a plus.
- Mic/speaker...the loss of a mic is definitely a downside of the new model, as is the alarm clock (due to the fact there's no speaker). This is the only actual downgrade if you ask me.
- "awesome nano design" -> subjective, again. I prefer this design, for one.
- Cover flow is useless (my opinion unless you're on an iPhone)

I think it's a step towards the future and away from the old we're used to. The clickwheel is legendary, yet maybe it's time to let it go, with Apple moving towards touch interfaces for their mobile devices such as the iPhone/iPod touch/iPad. I'm liking the interface and the intuitiveness of it, as well as the possibilty for a Nano-watch. :D

My 2 cents.

I'll be picking one up soon enough. :)

[goldenlotus]

You think that was a mistake? They do that on purpose so that iteration II can come out with all those features.

[Brien]

Does the new one still have Nike+?

[Peterson8765]

I don't think it's a "downgrade"...

- Video camera was useless and terrible quality (640x480 IIRC). No loss here. You couldn't even take pictures with it, never mind the horrid resolution.
- 2.2 vs 1.54 is not a big deal, in fact, are you bringing this up because you honestly watched movies on that screen? :p
- Tacticle clickwheel support is subjective. I'm a fan of touch interfaces so this is awesome for me, you might disagree, but this isn't a downgrade as much as it is a change, which some will like, and some will dislike. You still have external volume controls, which is a plus.
- Mic/speaker...the loss of a mic is definitely a downside of the new model, as is the alarm clock (due to the fact there's no speaker). This is the only actual downgrade if you ask me.
- "awesome nano design" -> subjective, again. I prefer this design, for one.
- Cover flow is useless (my opinion unless you're on an iPhone)

I think it's a step towards the future and away from the old we're used to. The clickwheel is legendary, yet maybe it's time to let it go, with Apple moving towards touch interfaces for their mobile devices such as the iPhone/iPod touch/iPad. I'm liking the interface and the intuitiveness of it, as well as the possibilty for a Nano-watch. :D
My 2 cents.

I'll be picking one up soon enough. :)

I'm not that much of a fan of the click wheel as I prefer touch more than click wheel but other people have said they would hate to see the click wheel go on the nano, I just think it's a downgrade in my eyes. The video quality wasn't great but was pretty good for just uploading to YouTube or other social networking websites. The main thing that gets me about this new nano is the price. $149 for something that costs probably $50-$70 for Apple to make? No thanks. I think $99 would be more suitable then I would probably buy one.

You think that was a mistake? They do that on purpose so that iteration II can come out with all those features.

That's Apple, the 7G nano will probably be touch, but with a bigger display at most likely 2.0" and a lotta features.

[Googlyhead]

Does the new one still have Nike+?

The tech specs say yes; it has Nike+ support - just not built-in (presumably via the old dongle!)

[Peterson8765]

Does the new one still have Nike+?

I didn't see anything about Nike+ with this new one.

[Jessica Lares]

I think that they were having a hard time implementing iOS in the old form, but at the same time didn't want to make the Nano any bigger. I understand that - Six icons would have looked a bit weird. I also think that keeping the clickwheel with iOS would have been like adding a keyboard.

It could have been half the size of the iPod Touch though, and I think by next year this model will be ditched for in favor of that. The huge thing people will be complaining about is the size, I'm very sure about that. I wish Apple didn't stereotype and remember that a lot of us computer nerds have fat fingers.

Another thing to remember is that I bet a lot of parents don't want their kids to have Internet/Safari on their iPods, drew some people away from buying the Touch. This opens up a little to that market.

If they had made it a little bigger, they could have opened a new App Store market too, kinda like what they did with the original iPods that were in color.

[HLdan]

The new nano that just came out may look pretty nice with all of its colors and its flashy looks, but what it all comes down to is features and performance. The new nano 6G in my eyes basically downgrades what a great product the nano 5G was. The nano 6G doesn't have any real improved or new features except for a different User Interface and a tiny 1.54" multi-touch display. It excludes the video camera, the much bigger 2.2" display, the tactile support of a click wheel which many loved, a microphone, a speaker, cover flow, an alarm clock, and of course the awesome nano design and 9 colors. Apple as well thinks they can get away with it costing the same $149 for an 8GB model and $179 for a 16GB model, is just plain ridiculous. What do you guys think of this new nano?

Well I don't know what you mean by performance. We're talking about a device that's now small enough to be a wrist watch. You neglected to acknowledge one thing and that should address why Apple made the new Nano the way they did. You neglected to see it from the average customer standpoint and not the MR geeks standpoint. Sure, as an MR geek you want a lot of functions. The Nano's claim to fame was never features or performance (whatever you meant by performance), but rather it's all about being small, cute and easy to use with a screen. Touch is becoming popular on Apple devices and it was appropriate to add it to the Nano but the camera and speaker, and you're saying "Many loved the clickwheel on the previous Nano", says who? How did you get those facts? I couldn't care less whether it was there or not.

Basically the average customer will love the new Nano. Plus Apple obviously wants to attract more iPod Touch users so it will have all the bells and whistles.

[rgarjr]

touch interface is cool on the iphone/ipod touch/ipad but don't want it also on the nano, come on now.. :mad:

[Googlyhead]

I think it's a step towards the future and away from the old we're used to. The clickwheel is legendary, yet maybe it's time to let it go, with Apple moving towards touch interfaces for their mobile devices such as the iPhone/iPod touch/iPad. I'm liking the interface and the intuitiveness of it, as well as the possibilty for a Nano-watch. :D

Could have sweetened the pot a little with built-in Nike+, Bluetooth, wi-fi, or a capacity bump tho. As it is, there's no particular reason to pick this over the previous model (if you discount the interface and dimensions.)

[shoebobs]

I am very happy with the new Nano.

The iPod line is no longer a market driver for Apple. Most people already own iPods or iPhones and it looks like the new Nano is meant to be a secondary iPod for these people.

I myself have an iPhone an iPod classic and a shuffle (with buttons), but I still plan on purchasing the Nano. My iPhone is obviously with me all the time, the iPod classic and it's massive storage is for my car and the shuffle is for when I go on 10+ mile runs and need something that can withstand sweat/rain.

However, like I said I will still get the Nano largely because of the FM tuner and compact form factor. This makes it perfect for the gym - it is small/won't get in the way and I will be able to tune into the TV audio the gym broadcasts through FM signal. I suppose I could buy a small FM tuner, but the ability to also use it for my music/podcasts easily with iTunes is an added benefit.

I don't need video recording/whatever other features they removed for what I will be using it for. If you were hoping the new Nano could be the one device you carry around all the time, I can see how you may be dissapointed. It all depends on how you plan on using it.

[Peterson8765]

Well I don't know what you mean by performance. We're talking about a device that's now small enough to be a wrist watch. You neglected to acknowledge one thing and that should address why Apple made the new Nano the way they did. You neglected to see it from the average customer standpoint and not the MR geeks standpoint. Sure, as an MR geek you want a lot of functions. The Nano's claim to fame was never features or performance (whatever you meant by performance), but rather it's all about being small, cute and easy to use with a screen. Touch is becoming popular on Apple devices and it was appropriate to add it to the Nano but the camera and speaker, and you're saying "Many loved the clickwheel on the previous Nano", says who? How did you get those facts? I couldn't care less whether it was there or not.

Basically the average customer will love the new Nano. Plus Apple obviously wants to attract more iPod Touch users so it will have all the bells and whistles.

Well from what I could read on many threads on here, many members said they liked the click wheel because of it's physical controls and didn't really like touch navigation.

touch interface is cool on the iphone/ipod touch/ipad but don't want it also on the nano, come on now.. :mad:

Yeah, a multi-touch display is suitable on the iPhone 4 and iPod touch because they both have 3.5" displays, but on a 1.54" multi-touch display on the new nano I think it's going to affect the people with large hands and it's not going to be a pleasant experience.

Well I don't know what you mean by performance. We're talking about a device that's now small enough to be a wrist watch. You neglected to acknowledge one thing and that should address why Apple made the new Nano the way they did. You neglected to see it from the average customer standpoint and not the MR geeks standpoint. Sure, as an MR geek you want a lot of functions. The Nano's claim to fame was never features or performance (whatever you meant by performance), but rather it's all about being small, cute and easy to use with a screen. Touch is becoming popular on Apple devices and it was appropriate to add it to the Nano but the camera and speaker, and you're saying "Many loved the clickwheel on the previous Nano", says who? How did you get those facts? I couldn't care less whether it was there or not.

Basically the average customer will love the new Nano. Plus Apple obviously wants to attract more iPod Touch users so it will have all the bells and whistles.

BTW, I'm not an MR geek, I'm a 13 year old consumer.

[Clix Pix]

When I first looked at what was being shown as the new iPod Nano, I thought, "oh, ugh!" but then started thinking about it and realized that by making this a touch device, Apple is not so far off the wall after all. How many times since I've had an iPhone have I picked up my old 5G iPod or my first-gen iPod Nano and without thinking, started poking at the screen before remembering that, oh, yes, they are not like my iPhone, they are not touch devices...... I've caught myself doing that in the store, too, when handling a newer model iPod. It really doesn't surprise me that Apple has realized that for many of us with iPhones or iPod Touches that we're now hooked on this way of communicating with our devices and so they're moving on into the future...... I probably won't be buying an iPod Nano, as I don't need one, but if I were in the market for it, yes, the fact that it is now touch-controlled would be very appealing to me. I never really liked the click-wheel way of doing things; to me, the visual cues of the icons and using one's fingers to access what one wants makes so much more sense. As for the fact that they've made the device into what looks like a postage-stamp-sized version of the iPad, well..... Maybe it could've been a little larger? On the other hand, there will be an audience for whom that tiny form factor will be most welcome and most desirable. I guess as time goes on, we'll see, won't we?

[skottichan]

Not at all, preordered a pink one to replace my workout 2nd gen Shuffle. As Steve said during the press conference, the Nano is no longer the sales leader, the Touch is. So, I'm guessing that was enough of a sign to add the cameras, faster processor, etc to the Touch. That freed up the Nano for experimentation, if this form factor doesn't work, it'll get a change, just like the buttonless Shuffle did.

[Peterson8765]

When I first looked at what was being shown as the new iPod Nano, I thought, "oh, ugh!" but then started thinking about it and realized that by making this a touch device, Apple is not so far off the wall after all. How many times since I've had an iPhone have I picked up my old 5G iPod or my first-gen iPod Nano and without thinking, starting poking at the screen before remembering that, oh, yes, they are not like my iPhone, they are not touch devices...... I've caught myself doing that in the store, too, when handling a newer model iPod. It really doesn't surprise me that Apple has realized that for many of us with iPhones or iPod Touches that we're now hooked on this way of communicating with our devices and so they're moving on into the future...... I probably won't be buying an iPod Nano, as I don't need one, but if I were in the market for it, yes, the fact that it is now touch-controlled would be very appealing to me. I never really liked the click-wheel way of doing things; to me, the visual cues of the icons and using one's fingers to access what one wants makes so much more sense. As for the fact that they've made the device into what looks like a postage-stamp-sized version of the iPad, well..... Maybe it could've been a little larger? On the other hand, there will be an audience for whom that tiny form factor will be most welcome and most desirable. I guess as time goes on, we'll see, won't we?

I think Apple did this because they want to focus on the touch in the future as they did at this event. The touch has a ton of things you can do with it and all these applications that are out and coming out for it make it amazing. You can do almost anything with the touch and now that the new one just came out it even made it a lot better with that new 1GHz A4, dual cameras, and that Retina display. Apps will be a lot better and can run to that full potential of the touch.

[DakotaGuy]

Steve hates buttons. That is what happened to the iPod Nano.

The same thinking went into making the 3rd Generation Shuffle. The reason why we see the buttons make a return on the 4th Generation Shuffle is because the 2nd Generation was much more successful. If the 3rd Generation Shuffle was really successful do you think Apple would have went back to a 2nd Generation design? Never.

I don't think the new Nano will do as well on the market, but maybe that is what Apple wants. People look at the Nano and think "that stinks" and then ending up buying an iPod Touch.

[HLdan]

BTW, I'm not an MR geek, I'm a 13 year old consumer.

You are so an MR geek. So am I, so is everyone else on MR. You registered here and you're talking about tech that the average consumer doesn't talk about. Do you honestly think most 13 year old kids that want a Nano are trippin' about Apple taking the camera,speaker and mic out? Most of them probably didn't even know it was in the previous gen. You ARE an MR Geek. :)

[goldenlotus]

BTW, I'm not an MR geek, I'm a 13 year old consumer.

You're posting on here so...


Average consumers don't start threads on mac messageboards.

[Peterson8765]

Well, I do love tech. Haha

You are so an MR geek. So am I, so is everyone else on MR. You registered here and you're talking about tech that the average consumer doesn't talk about. Do you honestly think most 13 year old kids that want a Nano are trippin' about Apple taking the camera,speaker and mic out? Most of them probably didn't even know it was in the previous gen. You ARE an MR Geek. :)

A lot of my friends don't even know what I'm talking about and think I'm trippin when I talk about tech gadgets and things. I guess I am.

Steve hates buttons. That is what happened to the iPod Nano.

The same thinking went into making the 3rd Generation Shuffle. The reason why we see the buttons make a return on the 4th Generation Shuffle is because the 2nd Generation was much more successful. If the 3rd Generation Shuffle was really successful do you think Apple would have went back to a 2nd Generation design? Never.

I don't think the new Nano will do as well on the market, but maybe that is what Apple wants. People look at the Nano and think "that stinks" and then ending up buying an iPod Touch.

Perhaps Apple will revert to the 5G design next year? I think they will still have the multi-touch display but bigger.

[lostime]

the Nano was added to the lineup for runners. The solid state drive would solve all the problems people were having bouncing their big Ipods around.

I loved the first nano, I could put in a strap-case on my arm and control everything via tactile feedback. Reach over, find the center of the clickwheel and hit left or right to go forward or back. Now there's no way to change songs without taking it off your arm, unlocking it, and then finding the spot on the screen assigned to changing songs. Try doing that while running and you'll make lots of friends when you start veering into them.

I know they don't care about runners, their main audience has gone to christmas presents for pre-teens.

[mrqasimi]

the screen look too small.. maybe its hard to navigate the songs. just my 2 cents.

[skottichan]

the Nano was added to the lineup for runners. The solid state drive would solve all the problems people were having bouncing their big Ipods around.

I loved the first nano, I could put in a strap-case on my arm and control everything via tactile feedback. Reach over, find the center of the clickwheel and hit left or right to go forward or back. Now there's no way to change songs without taking it off your arm, unlocking it, and then finding the spot on the screen assigned to changing songs. Try doing that while running and you'll make lots of friends when you start veering into them.

I know they don't care about runners, their main audience has gone to christmas presents for pre-teens.


Or, you can reteach yourself? It's not that hard to blind navigate touch, and even easier when it's a 3cmx3cm square.

[Peterson8765]

the Nano was added to the lineup for runners. The solid state drive would solve all the problems people were having bouncing their big Ipods around.

I loved the first nano, I could put in a strap-case on my arm and control everything via tactile feedback. Reach over, find the center of the clickwheel and hit left or right to go forward or back. Now there's no way to change songs without taking it off your arm, unlocking it, and then finding the spot on the screen assigned to changing songs. Try doing that while running and you'll make lots of friends when you start veering into them.

I know they don't care about runners, their main audience has gone to christmas presents for pre-teens.

When the iPod touch first came out at a price of $299 for a mere 8GB of storage, none of my friends got them because they were a little too spendy for a christmas present, but that year when they came out a lot of my friends got the nano 3G for Christmas, I kind of see that this year, but last Christmas a lot of my friends got the touch 8GB 2G/3G because it was only $199.

The easiest iPod for running is the iPod shuffle - Just buttons = easy navigation through songs when your running.

[dorky24]

There are things i like about the ipod Nano, in particular the voice over support and the sports clip. However, as a person with a rather large library of music, I feel that navigating songs on that tiny screen would be a hassle. Looking at the pictures, it seems that only 4 or 5 entries at once, which is a serious dearth in my opinion. Since my ipod mini broke down, i guess i'm now looking at the fifth generation and an aftermarket case for the sports clip.

[gianly1985]

I don't think it's a "downgrade"...

- Video camera was useless and terrible quality (640x480 IIRC). No loss here. You couldn't even take pictures with it, never mind the horrid resolution.

Doesn't look THAT terrible to me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-I--4JrERI

It was a nice added feature for a device that thin.
Same for the loudspeaker and the mic. It was a swiss-knife feather-weighted pocketable gadget. You wanted to film something funny? Bam! You wanted an alarm clock when traveling? Slam! You wanted to watch a Family Guy episode (funny lines are just as funny on a tiny screen, same applies to a lot of other shows, of course you aren't supposed to watch Avatar on it) on the bus? Bam! Plus FM radio, podcasts, etc
With the 5G, the iPod Nano reached its top in functionality.

Now it's a Shuffle with a touchscreen, more storage, the dock connector, video out and fm radio. Which is still a WIN for a lot of people, don't get me wrong. The touch (THAT touch) interface is so natural and fast. And the "clip-on" design is so small and convenient.

Let's just hope it will re-gain the 5th gen features year by year, but in the new touch-based and clip-oriented paradigm.

[DakotaGuy]

The easiest iPod for running is the iPod shuffle - Just buttons = easy navigation through songs when your running.

I agree. I still use a 1st Gen Shuffle for this. Anyone have one of those or remember them? LOL The 3rd Gen would have been terrible for running because you had to use the Apple ear buds and they would fall out.

[Peterson8765]

I agree. I still use a 1st Gen Shuffle for this. Anyone have one of those or remember them? LOL The 3rd Gen would have been terrible for running because you had to use the Apple ear buds and they would fall out.

Exactly. I hate how shuffle 3G users are basically forced to use Apple's own earbuds unless they buy a third party $20-$30 adapter.

[Warbrain]

Pretty disappointed, both with the design and capacities that they're offering overall.

The design is really a step backwards. The square shape is silly, the touchscreen is a gimmick, and it's way too small to be used outside of using it while you exercice. The old nanos were nicely pocketable - small enough you didn't notice but long enough you could grab them. This you'll be fishing around for it.

The capacities (for all models) is just sad. Bump it a bit.

[bigmacman]

I think the Shuffle will be discontinued in the next couple of years, and this new Nano will become the entry level iPod in size and price. Apple will then launch an iPod Touch Mini to sit between the full size Touch and the Nano. The iPod range will then be fully touch screen based.

[Savor]

A little bit.

The form factor seems nice, but that's it. Apple repackaged the iPod nano into a shuffle with a touchscreen.

Apple took away features which doesn't make it a worthwhile. Keep and savor the 5th gen iPod nano as it got it mostly right in that form factor. Sometimes an upgrade really is not a worthy upgrade. This is one of those years where the oldie is still the goodie.

I find the 6th gen iPod nano as just a trial and error year for Apple in this form factor. Expect more refinement and those features back for next year. I expect alot of buyer's remorse once the touchscreen gimmick wears off with this model.

[alust2013]

Note how apple backpedaled on the shuffle - it's basically a slightly repackaged 2nd gen with a couple extra features. I think that the nano will likely do the same, or what would be nice is split into touch and non touch versions. Personally, I think the 5G was brilliant for that type of product. It seems that the nano has been apple's experiment the whole time. When it came out, there weren't other players that small with reasonable features or capacities, then they changed to the squareish one and added video. Video was cool, the shape was awkward, so they switched back to the shape that worked. I'll have to play with one to decide whether or not I like it. Don't plan on buying one, I'm actually looking at a 32GB touch - my 8 filled up pretty quick...and it's losing support for a lot of apps, among other things

[chris975d]

I posted my opinion of the new Nano in another thread on the subject, but I'll post a bit of it below:
I may be in the minority here, but I actually really like the device that they are calling the Nano now, although I think it might should have been introduced as a different product altogether, instead of replacing the Nano. It's very small, has lots of storage space (for its size), a color touch screen, and still has hardware volume buttons. I love the concept, and have ordered one already to replace my last gen Shuffle and Nano combined, since with the Shuffle I could never select individual tracks that I wanted, and with the Nano I hated having a 3rd party case just to clip it on my shirt or belt when working out. Plus, I never ever used the video camera function of the Nano one single time. Nor have I ever watched video on a screen as small as the Nano. I only bought the last gen Nano for the FM receiver, which this new one has. The new "Nano" is the perfect device for me to merge my Shuffle and Nano usage into one device. But, as I said, I think it should have been introduced as an entirely new iPod line, because I can still see many people wanting the features the last gen Nano has that got removed with this new Nano. The Nano in it's 5th gen form (last year's) should have been left to eventually take over the iPod Classic's spot. This new Nano introduced today should really be a "Shuffle+ (Plus)", or something to that effect. It's basically a tricked out Shuffle, which is exactly what I want for the device. Something that is similar in size to the Shuffle, but with more control over song selection than the Shuffle has.

[Peterson8765]

Pretty disappointed, both with the design and capacities that they're offering overall.

The design is really a step backwards. The square shape is silly, the touchscreen is a gimmick, and it's way too small to be used outside of using it while you exercice. The old nanos were nicely pocketable - small enough you didn't notice but long enough you could grab them. This you'll be fishing around for it.

The capacities (for all models) is just sad. Bump it a bit.

I was expecting them to bump it up to 32GB, but it would be weird for a small device to have 32 gigs.

I posted my opinion of the new Nano in another thread on the subject, but I'll post a bit of it below:
I may be in the minority here, but I actually really like the device that they are calling the Nano now, although I think it might should have been introduced as a different product altogether, instead of replacing the Nano. It's very small, has lots of storage space (for its size), a color touch screen, and still has hardware volume buttons. I love the concept, and have ordered one already to replace my last gen Shuffle and Nano combined, since with the Shuffle I could never select individual tracks that I wanted, and with the Nano I hated having a 3rd party case just to clip it on my shirt or belt when working out. Plus, I never ever used the video camera function of the Nano one single time. Nor have I ever watched video on a screen as small as the Nano. I only bought the last gen Nano for the FM receiver, which this new one has. The new "Nano" is the perfect device for me to merge my Shuffle and Nano usage into one device. But, as I said, I think it should have been introduced as an entirely new iPod line, because I can still see many people wanting the features the last gen Nano has that got removed with this new Nano. The Nano in it's 5th gen form (last year's) should have been left to eventually take over the iPod Classic's spot. This new Nano introduced today should really be a "Shuffle+ (Plus)", or something to that effect. It's basically a tricked out Shuffle, which is exactly what I want for the device. Something that is similar in size to the Shuffle, but with more control over song selection than the Shuffle has.

I agree, they should have have made it the Shuffle touch or like you said, the shuffle plus which is better and make it it's own product and continue the same form factor of the iPod nano but with a slightly larger screen at like 2.4", HD video camera, and possibly a touch screen with 32GB. I'm just disappointed.

[shoebobs]

I agree. I still use a 1st Gen Shuffle for this. Anyone have one of those or remember them? LOL The 3rd Gen would have been terrible for running because you had to use the Apple ear buds and they would fall out.

Try these. They're cheap and they work with the iPod ear buds. I've ran hundreds of miles with them and they've never budged.

http://www.budfits.com/

[Peterson8765]

To be honest, if this new iPod nano was a reasonable $99, which still sounds like a lot for this small of a product with not a lot of features, I would probably buy it. Archos just released the Archos 28 PMP with a 2.8" touch screen, Android 2.2 Froyo, Wi-Fi, with music, VIDEOS (pun to the new nano), voice recording, speaker, photos, and an okay experience app store. All that for $99 at 4GB and $149 for 8GB which doesn't sound bad. Apple is selling this nano at the same price of $149 at 8GB and $179 for 16GB for a downscaled product. Ugh.

[anthorumor]

The screen literally looks like it's been tacked onto the shuffle. It just looks strange with that black border. Why they didnt just let the screen and the casing meet is mind boggling.

If Apple kept on selling the 5th gen nano alongside the new one I'm sure we'd wonder less

here's how it should have been:

Apple store:
iPod nano 'video' 5th Gen
8GB $119 16GB $149

iPod nano 6th Gen
8GB $99 16GB $129

[Peterson8765]

Try these. They're cheap and they work with the iPod ear buds. I've ran hundreds of miles with them and they've never budged.

http://www.budfits.com/

Looks pretty cool, but at $8.99 - $12.99 prices plus shipping, wouldn't you might as well get a relatively good set of earbuds?

[chris650]

really looking forward to find the wrist band that the nano can be attached to... cook watch!!!!

[Peterson8765]

The screen literally looks like it's been tacked onto the shuffle. It just looks strange with that black border. Why they didnt just let the screen and the casing meet is mind boggling.

If Apple kept on selling the 5th gen nano alongside the new one I'm sure we'd wonder less

here's how it should have been:

Apple store:
iPod nano 'video' 5th Gen
8GB $119 16GB $149

iPod nano 6th Gen
8GB $99 16GB $129

Agreed. $99 seems way more reasonable. I got a head ache when Steve said the nano was staying at $149 and $179 for 8GB and 16GB.

[anthorumor]

Even though the new nano is built for the active person in mind, did it occur to Apple that perhaps direct sunlight would prohibit the usefulness of a touch screen based inferface? You wouldn't be able to see the thing unlike physical buttons.

And $99 nano - c'mon Apple this is how you entice people into your ecosystem!

[bruinsrme]

I agree, they should have have made it the Shuffle touch or like you said, the shuffle plus which is better and make it it's own product and continue the same form factor of the iPod nano but with a slightly larger screen at like 2.4", HD video camera, and possibly a touch screen with 32GB. I'm just disappointed.

I was looking forward to the new nano hoping for a camera improvement and maybe a larger screen.
Unfortunately to me the new nano is a touch screen shuffle.
Put the $200 allocated for a new device towards my sons new tv.

[imsoindy]

Go back a decade to when the iPod was invented - What is it for? Playing music, that's it. Sure there are a few people who used the camera and alarm clock and watched video...but the keyword is a few. If people want to have a high functionality device, they should go for the touch, not the nano. All that being said, I only have one beef with the new Nano: the price. 150 wasn't a bad price for the feature-filled 5g, but for such a simplified device (which I'll repeat that I do personally like), there should have been a big price drop. And the 230 entry point for a touch is really high. Price points should be this: 8gb nano - 100, 16gb - 120, 8 gb touch - 175 or even up to 200 and then 100 more for each HD upgrade. This is getting long, but one last point. There were no HD upgrades at all this year. An 8 gb touch sounds like a thing of the past, especially when the tiny new nano with 16 gb is $50 cheaper.

[rgarjr]

Go back a decade to when the iPod was invented - What is it for? Playing music, that's it. Sure there are a few people who used the camera and alarm clock and watched video...but the keyword is a few. If people want to have a high functionality device, they should go for the touch, not the nano.

I would agree with that statement except for the fact that the nano already had all those features (bigger screen, video) and were stripped away.

[Savor]

I agree that this iPod nano should have an entry price of $99. Instead, Apple took away some features, didn't give it a memory boost, and the price still didn't drop. The minimum $149 price just doesn't seem to warrant a buy for what it actually will offer.

The concept of it being a watch is cool though thanks to its new form factor. Skip this year, but the seeds of an idea to have more potential mp3/gadget watches has already been planted...

[iEvolution]

- Same price point, despite the fact I'm sure it is cheaper to manufacture
- No video support
- No camera
- No tactile feedback
- No capacity bumps
- Interface looks like it has no originality to set it apart from the touch

Yeah, not getting this one.

Will definitely get the shuffle, but won't get an iPod Touch until the magic 128GB point is reached [if ever].

[aafuss1]

I'm disappointed that Apple got rid of video recording camera on the new nano (sure the quality isn't good, but is fine for me).

Apple could have added some of the previous nano's video effects to the touch (which records video),

[smiddlehurst]

Steve hates buttons. That is what happened to the iPod Nano.

The same thinking went into making the 3rd Generation Shuffle. The reason why we see the buttons make a return on the 4th Generation Shuffle is because the 2nd Generation was much more successful. If the 3rd Generation Shuffle was really successful do you think Apple would have went back to a 2nd Generation design? Never.

I don't think the new Nano will do as well on the market, but maybe that is what Apple wants. People look at the Nano and think "that stinks" and then ending up buying an iPod Touch.

Umm, I think you've put the cart before the horse here. It's consumers that have been moving away from the Nano to the Touch for the last couple of years now, Apple have just looked at that trend and decided it's probably not worth building another Nano along the lines of the 5th Generation device as the consumer demand doesn't justify it.

I don't think any of us can say how it'll do on the market but I will say this: Apple just introduced a new nano that looks, well, new. I can't think of much that matches it on the high street and it definately has a niche all its own in the iPod lineup. Based on that I don't think it'll be a disaster at all. Will it sell less than the old Nano? Well, yes, because as Apple said demand was already dropping off for the nano and with the new Touch only $80 more the Nano line was going to suffer no matter what. Frankly with the Touch as capable as it now is it shouldn't come as a surprise to find anything below that in the range being a niche product.

[Parkin Pig]

I'm glad I have my 5th gen Nano. The size and form are perfect for me when walking or cycling, and the clickwheel is definitely the control of choice for in-pocket manipulation (cue smutty remarks).

I'm not an anti-touch Luddite, as I have a 2G iPod Touch and an iPad, but I don't want to have to fiddle with an impractically small screen everytime I want to change songs. IMHO the new Nano screen is just too small to be used effectively as a touchscreen, and the interface is a poor compromise. The loss of video playback is another unwelcome step backward.

I like the video camera and its filters on the 5G. Sure it’s only low-res, but it’s for fun, and fine for basic YouTube clips. As they say, the best camera is the one you have with you.

Grumbles aside, I’m sure the new model will sell well, as there is bound to be an audience for it. I think Apple missed an opportunity by not including a full-screen clock, as I would imagine a lot of young people would wear it on their wrist.

...and that’s my 2 (euro)cents

[bruinsrme]

Apple cut the nano line, its dead.

What we saw yesterday was:

The ipod shuffle of 2 years ago back from fat camp.

And the introduction of the shuffle pro.

[bigmacman]

I'm glad I have my 5th gen Nano. The size and form are perfect for me when walking or cycling, and the clickwheel is definitely the control of choice for in-pocket manipulation (cue smutty remarks).

I'm not an anti-touch Luddite, as I have a 2G iPod Touch and an iPad, but I don't want to have to fiddle with an impractically small screen everytime I want to change songs. IMHO the new Nano screen is just too small to be used effectively as a touchscreen, and the interface is a poor compromise. The loss of video playback is another unwelcome step backward.

I like the video camera and its filters on the 5G. Sure it’s only low-res, but it’s for fun, and fine for basic YouTube clips. As they say, the best camera is the one you have with you.

Grumbles aside, I’m sure the new model will sell well, as there is bound to be an audience for it. I think Apple missed an opportunity by not including a full-screen clock, as I would imagine a lot of young people would wear it on their wrist.

...and that’s my 2 (euro)cents

I like the full screen clock idea. Maybe Apple can include that as a software update. I'm sure accessories companies can produce wristbands to accomodate the nano to wear as a watch.

[AlasdairM]

I love the new iPod Nano so much I've just gone and snapped up a 5th gen before they're gone. :D

Stupid Apple.

I suppose they've still got a purchase out of me though so maybe they've still had the last laugh? :confused:

[MOROCman]

The screen is WAYYYY TOOOO SMALL to be a touchscreen it's ridiculous vie just ordered the shuffle in silver :D that looks like they hav taken the best parts of the old shuffle and made like an ULTIMATE shuffle :eek:

[glocke12]

I like the idea of a small MP3 player like the new nano, but they should have used this as replacement for the shuffle and kept or updated the nano.

As a person with big fingers and poor eyesight, I dont see the new nano being very easy to use. But than again, I am 42, and probably not in the age range that this is being marketed to.

[bindle]

It's just too darn awkwardly small for me. And taking away functionality yet keeping the same capacity and price isn't making me rush out to pick it up either.
During the presentation, when they first cut off the click wheel, I thought that looked like much more decent size & shape for a multitouch nano.

http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/8375/ipodliveblog20100197rme.jpg

[Bozley0621]

I love the new iPod Nano so much I've just gone and snapped up a 5th gen before they're gone. :D

I did the same thing. My yellow 16 gb should be here in a few days.

[masterslacker]

I don't see the screen lock/button lock anywhere. Is it possible to lock the display and volume buttons for placing in a pocket?

[boganrulz]

I like the full screen clock idea. Maybe Apple can include that as a software update. I'm sure accessories companies can produce wristbands to accomodate the nano to wear as a watch.

wasn't there a full screen clock screenshot on the keynote...im sure i saw that...

[Palomonkey71]

I would really have to use it before I can say I am truly disappointed with it. I can't say I am really excited about the multitouch display because the device itself is so small but maybeI really will like it when I use it so...

[Bozley0621]

wasn't there a full screen clock screenshot on the keynote...im sure i saw that...

I don't think a full screen lock is needed since you have to use multi-touch to twist the screen...I could be wrong.

[gnasher729]

Well from what I could read on many threads on here, many members said they liked the click wheel because of it's physical controls and didn't really like touch navigation.

Never mind what other people say, what is _your_ opinion?

I can tell you my opinion: The controls on the iPod Nano were quite fiddly, so my Nano often doesn't do what I want it to do, especially when I use it in the car. Tactile feedback is no good if it just tells me that I pressed the wrong button. I'd have to actually try it before I can judge it, but I think the user interface, especially when using it blindly, could be improved in the new nano. Touch user interface when done well works nicer with big fat fingers than a tiny scroll wheel.


I was looking forward to the new nano hoping for a camera improvement and maybe a larger screen.
Unfortunately to me the new nano is a touch screen shuffle.
Put the $200 allocated for a new device towards my sons new tv.

But Apple has exactly that; it is called the iPod Touch. If you allocated $200 for a Nano, you might as well get the Touch for $229.

[Peterson8765]

Apple cut the nano line, its dead.

What we saw yesterday was:

The ipod shuffle of 2 years ago back from fat camp.

And the introduction of the shuffle pro.

I think Apple did this because they wan't to focus more on multi-touch devices, and it's probably why they gave all the fame to the iPod touch this event.

I just hate the fact Apple took away a ton of features and they think they can get away with it by charging the same prices for a downscaled product with less features.

[ReallyBigFeet]

I think it depends on who Apple views as their market for the new touch Nano (or Nano Touch or whatever the hell they call it).

Its super tiny, almost toy-like, in jewel-tone colors and pretty much just does music with pretty displays. And you can wear it like jewelry.

If their target market is teenaged girls, with tiny fingers and not overly sophisticated needs, they hit a home run.

[cankid96]

i actually like the new nano's look but its features are.... :(
So hopefully if it does well in sales, apple will make the nxt revision with a few more features (speaker, bluetooth, etc.) and a slightly bigger touchscreen.

[Peterson8765]

i actually like the new nano's look but its features are.... :(
So hopefully if it does well in sales, apple will make the nxt revision with a few more features (speaker, bluetooth, etc.) and a slightly bigger touchscreen.

The features to price ratio on the new nano is way off, $99 is more suitable.

[shoebobs]

Looks pretty cool, but at $8.99 - $12.99 prices plus shipping, wouldn't you might as well get a relatively good set of earbuds?

I got them at a local bike shop for $9 (no shipping). It looks like a retailer on Amazon is selling them for even less with free shipping.

The main benefit for me was that after trying multiple options, these were the only way my headphones would stay in place throughout a long run and I could still use the built in remote on the apple earbuds. If you get a non-apple set of earbuds and want to use the remote, you have to buy an adapter.



By the way, does anybody know if the new nano is available in store yet? Online it says shipping in 1 week, so will it be available in store in 1 week, or is it already there?

[Streethawk]

the Nano was added to the lineup for runners. The solid state drive would solve all the problems people were having bouncing their big Ipods around.

I loved the first nano, I could put in a strap-case on my arm and control everything via tactile feedback. Reach over, find the center of the clickwheel and hit left or right to go forward or back. Now there's no way to change songs without taking it off your arm, unlocking it, and then finding the spot on the screen assigned to changing songs. Try doing that while running and you'll make lots of friends when you start veering into them.

I know they don't care about runners, their main audience has gone to christmas presents for pre-teens.


With the inevitable watch strap accessory that wont be a problem.

[Peterson8765]

I got them at a local bike shop for $9 (no shipping). It looks like a retailer on Amazon is selling them for even less with free shipping.

The main benefit for me was that after trying multiple options, these were the only way my headphones would stay in place throughout a long run and I could still use the built in remote on the apple earbuds. If you get a non-apple set of earbuds and want to use the remote, you have to buy an adapter.



By the way, does anybody know if the new nano is available in store yet? Online it says shipping in 1 week, so will it be available in store in 1 week, or is it already there?

You can currently preorder the nano online but it ships next week, I would assume that Apple Stores and Best Buy's and other retailers get them next week or the week after that.

I think it depends on who Apple views as their market for the new touch Nano (or Nano Touch or whatever the hell they call it).

Its super tiny, almost toy-like, in jewel-tone colors and pretty much just does music with pretty displays. And you can wear it like jewelry.

If their target market is teenaged girls, with tiny fingers and not overly sophisticated needs, they hit a home run.

I will probably see the new nano with a lot of teenagers (most likely girls) after this holiday season.

[dal20402]

To be honest, if this new iPod nano was a reasonable $99, which still sounds like a lot for this small of a product with not a lot of features, I would probably buy it. Archos just released the Archos 28 PMP with a 2.8" touch screen, Android 2.2 Froyo, Wi-Fi, with music, VIDEOS (pun to the new nano), voice recording, speaker, photos, and an okay experience app store. All that for $99 at 4GB and $149 for 8GB which doesn't sound bad. Apple is selling this nano at the same price of $149 at 8GB and $179 for 16GB for a downscaled product. Ugh.

But the Archos is bigger than an iPod touch. People buy nanos because they like the small size. I wouldn't want to drag that huge Archos to the gym or running.

Video playback will come back in the next generation. Nothing else that they dropped really matters.

[zkhrhm]

Touchscreen iPods have always been more expensive than clickwheel iterations with the same GB specs. This may be too long ago for you all to remember, but two days ago, an 8GB iPod nano with video recording capability was miles cheaper than an 8 GB iPod Touch without even a smidgen of a camera. So an 8GB iPod nano with touch screen would, by that logic, be miles more expensive than its clickwheel counterpart. To keep the same price, some things would have to go. Like, some things not do-or-die for a music player.

[Peterson8765]

But the Archos is bigger than an iPod touch. People buy nanos because they like the small size. I wouldn't want to drag that huge Archos to the gym or running.

Video playback will come back in the next generation. Nothing else that they dropped really matters.

The Archos 28 is actually smaller than the iPod touch 4G. and just a little bigger than the nano.

[One Love 1867]

Only thing I'm dissapointed about - and this is across the new iPod range in general - is the space options. If I want to fit my whole iTunes library onto an iPod (which, to be honest, I do) then the only option for me is still the classic. The classic is nice and all but I have to say my favorite form factor of the bunch is still the recently replaced Nano. I understand the shuffle's place in the market so being capped at smaller storage is fine for that, but I'm not so sure about the new Nano.

Of the new models, only the iPod Touch goes above 32GB, and I can do without a thinner version of my existing iPhone at over £300. It would have been nice to see a refresh of the more "traditional" iPod offerings at the same time.

Then again, you can't please everybody. I might be moaning here but the missus wants a new Shuffle so..

[Trek2100]

I don't think it's a "downgrade"...

- Video camera was useless and terrible quality (640x480 IIRC). No loss here. You couldn't even take pictures with it, never mind the horrid resolution.
- 2.2 vs 1.54 is not a big deal, in fact, are you bringing this up because you honestly watched movies on that screen? :p
- Tacticle clickwheel support is subjective. I'm a fan of touch interfaces so this is awesome for me, you might disagree, but this isn't a downgrade as much as it is a change, which some will like, and some will dislike. You still have external volume controls, which is a plus.
- Mic/speaker...the loss of a mic is definitely a downside of the new model, as is the alarm clock (due to the fact there's no speaker). This is the only actual downgrade if you ask me.
- "awesome nano design" -> subjective, again. I prefer this design, for one.
- Cover flow is useless (my opinion unless you're on an iPhone)

I think it's a step towards the future and away from the old we're used to. The clickwheel is legendary, yet maybe it's time to let it go, with Apple moving towards touch interfaces for their mobile devices such as the iPhone/iPod touch/iPad. I'm liking the interface and the intuitiveness of it, as well as the possibilty for a Nano-watch. :D

My 2 cents.

I'll be picking one up soon enough. :)

I have to agree. I'll be getting the Nano hopefully next week. It's the perfect companion for running, biking and working out. I currently use a V-iPod that I call the brick. Hard drives don't like a lot of bounce. The shuffle does not have enough capacity and I don't like changing playlists a lot when I get bored with the same selection of songs. The 16GB Nano is perfect. I personally do not need a camera and I don't watch videos clips on tiny screens. I have more than enough devices that do a much better job. Besides, I usually have a camera of some sort with me thats easily available. To each his/her own.

[HLdan]

Agreed. $99 seems way more reasonable. I got a head ache when Steve said the nano was staying at $149 and $179 for 8GB and 16GB.

Ha ha, you're looking at what's "reasonable", but what you fail to see is that those prices that Apple wants for the Nano, they KNOW they will get. I know you're only 13 years old so business may not be your first of interests, but it's business and if you were in business for yourself you'll try every effort to make as much money from your clients and customers as possible, especially if you know they will pay it. Also on some level, if you give your products away for too cheap, the value will diminish and it actually turns people off believe it or not. It's psychological, people are more apt to buying something that costs more, it's about perceived value.

[Peterson8765]

Ha ha, you're looking at what's "reasonable", but what you fail to see is that those prices that Apple wants for the Nano, they KNOW they will get. I know you're only 13 years old so business may not be your first of interests, but it's business and if you were in business for yourself you'll try every effort to make as much money from your clients and customers as possible, especially if you know they will pay it. Also on some level, if you give your products away for too cheap, the value will diminish and it actually turns people off believe it or not. It's psychological, people are more apt to buying something that costs more, it's about perceived value.

I know it's Apple's strategy to charge more for their consumer products such as the iPod nano.

Ha ha, you're looking at what's "reasonable", but what you fail to see is that those prices that Apple wants for the Nano, they KNOW they will get. I know you're only 13 years old so business may not be your first of interests, but it's business and if you were in business for yourself you'll try every effort to make as much money from your clients and customers as possible, especially if you know they will pay it. Also on some level, if you give your products away for too cheap, the value will diminish and it actually turns people off believe it or not. It's psychological, people are more apt to buying something that costs more, it's about perceived value.

But in my eyes, the nano isn't a good deal for what you get. Sure it's practical for some people who have money to burn for a shuffle alternative, which some people here want it for just that because their shuffle or nano recently got stolen or they just need an upgrade which is fine. But for teens and young adults I don't see a lot of them buying this, It has less functionality and features for the same price which is still expensive. A lot of my teen friends bought the 5G nano or got it for a gift and liked it for the video camera, the ability to watch movies, and other things. I see this new nano not succeeding as well as the last nano. Those are my 2 cents.

[tigress666]

I loved the first nano, I could put in a strap-case on my arm and control everything via tactile feedback. Reach over, find the center of the clickwheel and hit left or right to go forward or back. Now there's no way to change songs without taking it off your arm, unlocking it, and then finding the spot on the screen assigned to changing songs. Try doing that while running and you'll make lots of friends when you start veering into them.

I know they don't care about runners, their main audience has gone to christmas presents for pre-teens.

No, this is still great for runners (though you have to buy extra headphones, apple really should just include the headphones with remote). Just buy any headphones with remote and you have an excellent way of changing songs while running (far better in my opinion than the clickwheel. I love the remote on my ipod fifth gen and never use the clickwheel unless I am actually looking at the ipod).

I do agree that the Nano does need a way to physically change songs, but they really haven't gotten rid of that capacity. And I gotta agree with some one else, the clickwheel can get frustrating (I have a hard time using the scroll thing to stop exactly on what I want and it clicks so sensitively sometimes I click when I didn't mean to, gets annoying. I'd never try to use it while running, only the fast forward and rewind buttons which I have to feel around in my pocket to make sure I'm not pressing the wrong button. The remote is easier/quicker for me to figure out I'm hitting hte right button while walking/running). So the touch interface is better in my opinion for when you aren't running/walking an actually looking at the ipod to select something, and the remote is better for running/walking. So they really didn't get rid of anything necessary (i would be ranting with the rest of you honestly though if they removed the clickwheel and removed support for the headphone remote).

I think the Shuffle will be discontinued in the next couple of years, and this new Nano will become the entry level iPod in size and price. Apple will then launch an iPod Touch Mini to sit between the full size Touch and the Nano. The iPod range will then be fully touch screen based.

I could go with this. I think the shuffle has a ridiculously small amount of storage space, I like still having a screen to go to specific songs I want, and that's why I buy the Nano. At this point, the Nano pretty much has taken over any reason the shuffle was better (besides price which is why it's a very good thing Apple reduced the shuffle's price).


I may be in the minority here, but I actually really like the device that they are calling the Nano now, although I think it might should have been introduced as a different product altogether, instead of replacing the Nano. It's very small, has lots of storage space (for its size), a color touch screen, and still has hardware volume buttons. I love the concept, and have ordered one already to replace my last gen Shuffle and Nano combined, since with the Shuffle I could never select individual tracks that I wanted, and with the Nano I hated having a 3rd party case just to clip it on my shirt or belt when working out.

It's exactly why I'm drooling over the Nano despite just having gotten a new fifth gen a few months ago (had a third gen before and sorry, guys, I miss the form of the third gen. I'll go against the grain here and say I hate the long form!!! If the fifth gen didn't have so many improvements feature wise such as remote support, pedometer, and a much better software for searching songs, I'd have wished I stayed with the 3rd gen). Personally, for what I would do when I actually bother taking out the ipod and looking at it (selecting playlists/finding specific songs), the touch screen is superior (it's just much faster to go directly to what you want than having to use the scroll wheel). And for when I want physical buttons, the remote is better in my opinion. So since it supports the remote feature on the headphones, the new ipod is superior for controls imho.

Plus, I never ever used the video camera function of the Nano one single time. Nor have I ever watched video on a screen as small as the Nano.

I'll admit I used it... when the nano was brand new to me and I had to play with all hte features. Then once the newness wore off, totally didn't use it. I have a smartphone for that which is way superior. If you really need these functions, you really should just buy the touch. I think people who really think the video feature is a must have are more the market the touch aims at, not the nano.


The Nano in it's 5th gen form (last year's) should have been left to eventually take over the iPod Classic's spot.

This, I completely agree with. Give the nano a lot more storage space, keep it around the same size, and get rid of the classic. I really don't even see how the classic has much of a market anymore cause the only thing it's good for is large storage space which, well, with even the touch getting to 64 gigs, I really don't see them selling many for that storage space when you can compromise a little bit, get a smaller player wiht a whole lot more features. It really surprises me that they don't have the classic support a lot of "new" features (new features that have been around for quite a while at this point) and it is really just a very basic music player and nothing else. I don't see how they manage to sell that many at this point, especially when it's more expensive than even a Touch.

They really should at least introduce a lot of the new stuff they have given the other ipods to the classic ipod. Or in my opinion, better to replace it with the previous nano (with a whole lot more storage capacity).

[Trvlngnrs]

I'm buying one!!

I love the small size. I use my MP3 player mainly at the gym and working in the yard. I usually have it on "shuffle" so I don't look for individual songs to play. I only have songs that I like, so I don't need to look for a certain song. If I want fast music, I go to my "Fast" playlist. If I want Blues I'll go to that playlist. I like that the clip is included. I also like that the volume buttons are not part of the touchscreen. That would be a deal killer for me.

I do listen to Bible teachings. I wonder how difficult is is to go back a minute or two, if I want to re-listen to a point the Pastor just made?

Trvlngnrs

[tigress666]

This needs to be a poll BTW.

[roland.g]

In case this has not been answered, the Nike+ transmitter/receiver is built in to the new Nano, you don't need the dock dongle, just the shoe sensor.

I think the new Nano is awesome and is truly nano. The clip is great too. If you must must must must have a clickwheel, get a classic or a EOL 5G Nano from clearance stock.

[LLPE33]

Yes. I don't care for the form factor, the interface, and the elimination of features instead of upgrade (i.e.: the video camera). But that's all secondary, my main hope was for a 32GB nano. I would have bought one in either form factor. I don't want a touch or to spend $300 for 32GB and a punch of other features that I neither need nor want.

The memory issue goes across the line for me. there should be at least 16GB in the base touch and the top model should have 128GB. Sixteen and 32GB for the nano. I'm glad they bumped up the Classic's capacity, but it's either time to drop the price to the magical $199.00 price point or put in a larger screen and/or 64 or 128GB SSDs.

[Peterson8765]

Yes. I don't care for the form factor, the interface, and the elimination of features instead of upgrade (i.e.: the video camera). But that's all secondary, my main hope was for a 32GB nano. I would have bought one in either form factor. I don't want a touch or to spend $300 for 32GB and a punch of other features that I neither need nor want.

The memory issue goes across the line for me. there should be at least 16GB in the base touch and the top model should have 128GB. Sixteen and 32GB for the nano. I'm glad they bumped up the Classic's capacity, but it's either time to drop the price to the magical $199.00 price point or put in a larger screen and/or 64 or 128GB SSDs.

16GB should be the base for the touch, 8GB is just way to small for what the touch can do now a days. I do believe though, that 128GB is for next years model.

Poll has been added, everyone.

[aznguyen316]

speaking of reduction of features.. looks like the new nano does not have a speaker?

[Ish]

I've got all my language recordings on my nano. It lets me click back a few seconds without having to look and re-listen when I don't catch something. I hate it when I've got to use the touch screen on my phone instead. In fact, if it wasn't for the smaller memory and shorter battery life I'd choose the first gen nano as the clickwheel was nearer the centre and more comfortable to use. I won't be getting one of the new ones. Wonder how long refurbs will be in stock? :(

[bruinsrme]

But Apple has exactly that; it is called the iPod Touch. If you allocated $200 for a Nano, you might as well get the Touch for $229.

We have a couple of touch and a number of iPhones. Along with that I have last years shuffle and my wife has a nano.
The nano is/was the only iPod with video that was a great size, light weight with a decent screen. Most importantly it is the easiest iPod to use with one hand, heck with one finger.
Not so with the new nano.

I look forward to seeing what happens with the product line in a year.

[renewed]

Just bought one. Really wanting to turn this sucker into a watch. :D

[R94N]

Just bought one. Really wanting to turn this sucker into a watch. :D

Yeah, I think a lot of people are going to do that after the 'hint' at the Keynote.

[Peterson8765]

Yeah, I think a lot of people are going to do that after the 'hint' at the Keynote.

There will probably be tons of accessories to turn this new nano into a watch. The clock feature on this new nano looks pretty cool.

[tigress666]

Ack, I just voted no instead of yes (I answered the question to the title, not the question on the poll).

Oops.

Well, I get to decide which I like better, heh. My mom (on no spurring at all from me, I swear) decided she was so excited about the new ipods she bought me a nano and herself a Touch. (My mom, btw, is a case of Apple managing to convert people through the iphone/ipod. She was totally anti apple or at least anti mac. Now that she has her iphone 4 she loves it so much she's becoming a total apple geek! She even told me her next computer is probably going to be a mac... and she used to stick her nose up at macs. Though I'm not sure why she bought a touch when she has an iphone. Only thing I can think of is she has a huge music collection that even the iphone won't hold and she does have the biggest size iphone).

And yes, I do plan on using the sixth gen a bit just to make sure before I sell off my fifth gen. I suspect I'll like it better though. I'll miss my nifty ipod case I just bought for my current one though. And I like my current one's color better (they don't offer it in the new ones).

[Aero26]

Anyone remember these concepts?
http://blog.gadgetlite.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/concept-ipod-touch-nano-1.jpg
When I was reading through the blogs and hearing that that's exactly what was coming. I thought of leaving my iPod Touch, behind and joining the nano army. This...is probably cheaper to produce as though it might not be to scale, it looks like the 4G shuffle plus the touch screen. What's the point on that tiny a display? Many Touch users with classics will argue that the click wheel was fine for strictly music navigating. Why?

[Peterson8765]

Ack, I just voted no instead of yes (I answered the question to the title, not the question on the poll).

Oops.

Well, I get to decide which I like better, heh. My mom (on no spurring at all from me, I swear) decided she was so excited about the new ipods she bought me a nano and herself a Touch. (My mom, btw, is a case of Apple managing to convert people through the iphone/ipod. She was totally anti apple or at least anti mac. Now that she has her iphone 4 she loves it so much she's becoming a total apple geek! She even told me her next computer is probably going to be a mac... and she used to stick her nose up at macs).

And yes, I do plan on using the sixth gen a bit just to make sure before I sell off my fifth gen. I suspect I'll like it better though. I'll miss my nifty ipod case I just bought for my current one though. And I like my current one's color better (they don't offer it in the new ones).

If I were to pick between the two, I think I would pick the 5G. I usually like to own the latest and greatest gadgets, but I don't think I see myself using the 6G nano that much because I just don't listen to music. But that's just my opinion.

[tigress666]

If I were to pick between the two, I think I would pick the 5G. I usually like to own the latest and greatest gadgets, but I don't think I see myself using the 6G nano that much because I just don't listen to music. But that's just my opinion.

Well then I don't really think the nano is aimed at you then. I think you're more looking for a touch.

I really suspect those who are griping about the nano (save the lack of clickwheel) are really those who aren't really the market the nano is aimed at ;).

(Hint, I have an iphone already, the nano fits some certain niches the iphone is ok for but the nano is better... mainly being small and easily fitting places. Shoot, with the advent of the remote on the headphones, the nano has lost its advantage on being able to be controlled without looking at it).

[samk8000]

Th new iPod nano isn't something that i'd see myself buying for one reason, battery life. I have the second generation iPod nano and when I bought it, it had such an amazing battery life (24 hours) How come now, four generations later, I still see the same battery life on the spec sheets? Also, I could get an eight gb version then, I can now. I would but it with double the battery life, a retina screen, and 16 as a base and 32 as an upgrade.

[CandyCane23049]

Th new iPod nano isn't something that i'd see myself buying for one reason, battery life. I have the second generation iPod nano and when I bought it, it had such an amazing battery life (24 hours) How come now, four generations later, I still see the same battery life on the spec sheets? Also, I could get an eight gb version then, I can now. I would but it with double the battery life, a retina screen, and 16 as a base and 32 as an upgrade.

My battery life on my 5th is great. I can day's w/o charing my Nano. I'm on the fence about the Nano, i think I might just get another 5th not sure I want to deal with something so small. Also if they added more space I could justify the price.

[Peterson8765]

Well then I don't really think the nano is aimed at you then. I think you're more looking for a touch.

I really suspect those who are griping about the nano (save the lack of clickwheel) are really those who aren't really the market the nano is aimed at ;).

(Hint, I have an iphone already, the nano fits some certain niches the iphone is ok for but the nano is better... mainly being small and easily fitting places. Shoot, with the advent of the remote on the headphones, the nano has lost its advantage on being able to be controlled without looking at it).

I owned a 5G blue nano for a little bit and I liked it but what I really wanted was a touch. So I sold the nano and bought one. Before I even got the nano I had an older 2G touch and one of the reasons I sold that nano was because I missed the feeling of having a touch.

[foiden]

The only thing I kind of miss is the inability to play video on the nano. Of course, I shouldn't because I have enough iDevices, I already carry around, that do video way better than the previous nano. My phone kind of takes care of that if I don't have the iPad around.

The tiny size of the new nano is pretty nice, and hopefully the interface works as good as advertised. I guess I'll be able to head out to a store and check it out, personally. If I didn't already have iPhone4, the iPod touch would be very tempting, though. However, for those who want nothing in their pockets, can listen to music, and get a perfectly usable chic watch with it, I can see the new Nano's appeal. I kind of feel they should've done this with the nano before putting video on it.

But alas, I would guess some of this has to do with how memory has gotten smaller and smaller over the years. Throwing that many non-moving GBs into a tiny space isn't exactly what was done years ago. And then there's the battery. We're making advancements in that technology, but not that fast.

I still have the Nano before they made it the tall-form and with the cool color spectrum. On the other hand, I don't have any mixed feelings about the Shuffle or the Touch. They've made those as good as I could imagine them to be. However, I can see the argument of the new Nano replacing the Shuffle. I mean, with the Nano's features, who really needs the Shuffle? If they can make the price-point aggressive on the Nano, they could possibly make a $70 nano, with similar space limitations of the shuffle. Maybe in a year or two?

[Peterson8765]

I think they should have made this new nano 6G $99 and for $149 you get a larger 2.6"-2.8" touch screen with iOS, no cameras, and same res screen as the iPod touch 3G. That would bridge the gap pretty well. Also I too believe it is dumb to take video and movie playback from the nano away, you now have to spend $229 on the iPod touch to play videos and movies.

[larock]

I'm happy with the change to the Nano. I've had every generation of the Nano and I was so excited by the smaller size I bought it the instance it became available on the website.

I truly believe, the Nano is being aimed at the exercise crowd. That is one of the reasons for the loss of the video camera. Most gyms don't like cameras, especially tiny ones, in the gym or changing areas. With the 5th Gen it was such a slight change from the 4th that a gym employee would have to practically inspect the Nano to see it has a camera. But this version will stand out.

Whelp time for a run....

[Peterson8765]

I have heard from a lot of people that are going to use it for the gym and running.

[rgarjr]

my widescreen nano

http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/2289/63981640.jpg

[Peterson8765]

my widescreen nano

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/2289/63981640.jpg

Nice mock up pic dude

[iEvolution]

my widescreen nano

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/2289/63981640.jpg

Cowon?

[Liam8]

I dont like how there is a frame of metal around the frame of glass around the screen... The glass bezel should have been the end of the iPod like the iPhone and iPod

[Peterson8765]

I dont like how there is a frame of metal around the frame of glass around the screen... The glass bezel should have been the end of the iPod like the iPhone and iPod

Yeah I think the screen should have been flush with the anodized aluminum enclosure.