Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > iPhone, iPod and iPad > iPod

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Sep 20, 2012, 06:26 PM   #76
coachingguy
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Great White, Albeit Frozen North
Wow, I'm shocked how many people here loved the square nano. I hated it! I'm still using the 1st nano and 5th... What was the point of square screen that was so small you couldn't really see anything on it. I agree, I thought the watch idea was neat... But I never met anyone who wore it as a watch.

This harkens back to the original idea behind the Nano in the 1st place. I predict it will sell big time. Small, useable screen, good battery life, nice options, good storage.

"...My oh my, where oh where will I clip it?" Really?

Coachingguy
__________________
iPhone 5 "Vader", i5 MBP 15", MBA 11' i5, iPad, iPad 2, MBP 2.5, , 32 gig Wifi iPad & iPad 2, Canon 50D
The future is determined by the decisions made today.
coachingguy is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 21, 2012, 06:26 AM   #77
ManicMarc
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
I don't see a point in the Nano (other than for small kids too young for an iPod Touch/iPhone). Runners / Gym users have the shuffle, everyone else has the iPod Touch. It doesn't even support iTunes Match (no WiFi).

Pointless. The Classic at least has massive capacity (great for keeping in the car).

Sorry Nano.
ManicMarc is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 21, 2012, 11:43 AM   #78
rapaleeman
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by ManicMarc View Post
I don't see a point in the Nano (other than for small kids too young for an iPod Touch/iPhone). Runners / Gym users have the shuffle, everyone else has the iPod Touch. It doesn't even support iTunes Match (no WiFi).

Pointless. The Classic at least has massive capacity (great for keeping in the car).

Sorry Nano.
That's kind of my thoughts too.

I'm curious as to who this device was designed for. What was their target market?

The older Nanos really existed due to the high price of the standard iPods and their hard drive based storage along with emerging technology of MP3 players as a market segment. Now that MP3 players, even the iPod Touches, aren't really that expensive in the scheme of things, and that MP3 players are a dime a dozen now, who really needs one of these.

Sure a few people are on board to update older devices but what is this devices true purpose? There are so many other devices that fill the role of MP3 player better and those that want an iPhone style device have the iTouch which his also a small and great music playing device (meaning it is an MP3 player). Then there is the iPad which is also a music player as well.

It seems to me that Apple just didn't want to kill this line like they essentially have done with the Classic since it would take another several skus off their product line. In reality though, it seems like this device just exists to take up shelf space.

Say what you want about the Nano 6G being a bastardization of the 5G iPod Nano, but at least it had a reason for existing in the market place. That clip along with the storage size and the prices were a great value to a lot of people. This device not so much.
rapaleeman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 22, 2012, 06:21 AM   #79
Cloysterpeteuk
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
This will be my first Nano purchase since the 1st gen model, I just want a small light mp3 player that looks good and that I don't even feel in my pocket.q

This model with lovely screen for albumn art, Bluetooth for speakers when at home, new earphones and more importantly great battery life means this model is perfect for me.

iPod touch would be a pointless purchase for me, loads more expensive and I already have an iPhone and iPad which can do all the same things. Whereas the Nano will be used in situations where I don't want a bigger iPhone with me - out for a run or I want to chill out to some tunes when walking the dog and not be disturbed by incoming texts, calls, notificications etc.

Younger bro is buying one also, his old touch just broke and he wants one of these as he never bothered with apps on the touch, just used it solely for music.
Cloysterpeteuk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 23, 2012, 12:11 PM   #80
karlwig
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
They should have put antennas and a micro-sim tray in it and called it the iPhone nano.

I would actually buy that -- great for days when you want a lighter phone to take with you.
karlwig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 23, 2012, 01:01 PM   #81
macnerd93
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: United kingdom
seems like Apple are neglecting one of the very things what saved them. Please god don't neglect the Mac thats all I ask.
__________________
21.5'' iMac, iMac G4, iMac G5, Power Mac G5 Dual, PowerBook G4, MacBook Pro, MacBook, Mac mini C2D, eMac, Power Mac G4 AGP Graphics, Power Mac G4 Quicksilver, iPod 4th Gen, iPad mini, iPhone 5S,
macnerd93 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 24, 2012, 12:32 AM   #82
Qgirl
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by ManicMarc View Post
Runners / Gym users have the shuffle, everyone else has the iPod Touch.
People keep saying that, but though the Shuffle is certainly super convenient at the gym, it's also TINY (I'm talking capacity, not physical size). You have to be constantly changing your playlists on it, because pretty quickly you can't add anything new. And you can not reasonably use it for audiobooks or even podcasts. Having something like the 16 gb Nano that you can clip to your clothes like a Shuffle but it holds all your stuff ... priceless. This new one will have to go in a pocket. I don't always have pockets.
Qgirl is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 24, 2012, 09:10 AM   #83
PinkyMacGodess
macrumors 68000
 
PinkyMacGodess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Midwest America.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ftaok View Post
I doubt Nike would be working on an integrated Nike+ receiver/Bluetooth transmitter.
Why not? That's the way most of their stuff seems to work now. I don't think that will be too far off...
PinkyMacGodess is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 24, 2012, 09:18 AM   #84
ftaok
macrumors 601
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: East Coast
Quote:
Originally Posted by PinkyMacGodess View Post
Why not? That's the way most of their stuff seems to work now. I don't think that will be too far off...
I was referring to Nike making a new transmitter that includes BT and the Nike+ protocols with a 30-pin connector. This would be for the nano6G (and older devices).

Since the 30-pin connector is effectively discontinued, I doubt Nike would be working on any hardware that uses 30-pin.

Anyway, I don't think Nike would be making any more stand-alone transmitters as all of the new devices have BT built-in, so they would likely allow for the hardware guys to use the Nike+ protocol (which uses the same frequencies as BT). This would be like how the iPod touch and iPhone can access the Nike+ footpod.
__________________
Flickr
ftaok is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 24, 2012, 09:26 AM   #85
PinkyMacGodess
macrumors 68000
 
PinkyMacGodess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Midwest America.
So far I think that the best iPod for runners and gym animals was the stick 3G Shuffle. No display, simple, just a switch and a hole for the headphones. For skiing, the display didn't freeze, for outdoor stuff, I clip it to my hat for mowing and other general maintenance. Then they went back to the brick with buttons. Downgrade...

I loved the original squarish 3G Nano too. I have three around here somewhere. They worked with the Nike+ and were small enough, although they needed a clip very badly. My original clip case for them broke and I haven't been able to find a replacement. Not a fan of the 6G Nano.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by ftaok View Post
I was referring to Nike making a new transmitter that includes BT and the Nike+ protocols with a 30-pin connector. This would be for the nano6G (and older devices).

Since the 30-pin connector is effectively discontinued, I doubt Nike would be working on any hardware that uses 30-pin.

Anyway, I don't think Nike would be making any more stand-alone transmitters as all of the new devices have BT built-in, so they would likely allow for the hardware guys to use the Nike+ protocol (which uses the same frequencies as BT). This would be like how the iPod touch and iPhone can access the Nike+ footpod.
Sorry I misunderstood... I would think that the older dock is a done deal at this point. Is the pod Bluetooth? I wasn't aware and assumed it was something else, although it would make sense if it were. The chest strap isn't Bluetooth though because Polar has their own frequency range they work with.

I'm still pissed Nike+ dropped their wrist controller. That was so cool product. It made it so easy to control the iPod playback... But technology marches on I guess...
PinkyMacGodess is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 10, 2012, 10:52 PM   #86
Braniff747SP
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Los Angeles, California, USA
Its nice, but I like the sixth generation more for my uses. I clip it on to my sleeping bag when I go camping... The battery life is fantastic; when I'm at long-term camps, it gets through without recharging without a problem.

This new one just seems to big for that use. Also, I'm curious--how does that bigger display impact battery life?
__________________
Mid-2012 13" MacBook Pro with Studio Display, Late 2008 13'' Black MacBook, 1st generation iPad, iPhone 4S.
Braniff747SP is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 10, 2012, 11:40 PM   #87
RyanG
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braniff747SP View Post
Its nice, but I like the sixth generation more for my uses. I clip it on to my sleeping bag when I go camping... The battery life is fantastic; when I'm at long-term camps, it gets through without recharging without a problem.

This new one just seems to big for that use. Also, I'm curious--how does that bigger display impact battery life?
Did you even read the tech specs for the new nano?

Built-in rechargeable lithium-ion battery
Music playback time: Up to 30 hours when fully charged
Video playback time: Up to 3.5 hours when fully charged
RyanG is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 06:16 PM   #88
Braniff747SP
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Los Angeles, California, USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanG View Post
Did you even read the tech specs for the new nano?

Built-in rechargeable lithium-ion battery
Music playback time: Up to 30 hours when fully charged
Video playback time: Up to 3.5 hours when fully charged
30 hours? That's pretty good. I'll need to check how much the sixth generation's battery life is.
__________________
Mid-2012 13" MacBook Pro with Studio Display, Late 2008 13'' Black MacBook, 1st generation iPad, iPhone 4S.
Braniff747SP is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 08:23 PM   #89
ftaok
macrumors 601
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: East Coast
Quote:
Originally Posted by PinkyMacGodess View Post
Sorry I misunderstood... I would think that the older dock is a done deal at this point. Is the pod Bluetooth? I wasn't aware and assumed it was something else, although it would make sense if it were. The chest strap isn't Bluetooth though because Polar has their own frequency range they work with.

I'm still pissed Nike+ dropped their wrist controller. That was so cool product. It made it so easy to control the iPod playback... But technology marches on I guess...
The Nike+ footpod works on the same frequency as Bluetooth, but it's proprietary. iPhones and iPod touches can use the footpod since they have BT reciever and I guess Nike gives them the "codes" to translate the signals.

Anyways, it looks like the 7G nano can utilize the Nike+ footpod. Woohoo! It can also send signals to a BT headphone and receive signals to a BT HR strap while communicating with the footpod. This is huge, but a part of me wishes they added these features to the 6G nano form factor.
__________________
Flickr
ftaok is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 11:47 PM   #90
jacoder
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: California
Yeap, it is great!!!


iPod Nano (RED) 7th Generation by Tohru にゃん, on Flickr


iPod Nano (RED) 7th Generation by Tohru にゃん, on Flickr


iPod Nano (RED) 7th Generation by Tohru にゃん, on Flickr

Compare with iPhone 5:


iPod Nano vs iPhone 5 by Tohru にゃん, on Flickr


iPod Nano vs iPhone 5 by Tohru にゃん, on Flickr
jacoder is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2012, 11:28 AM   #91
lshaner
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
No it isn't great.

Please allow me to enumerate the ways that is is a dud:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1467573
__________________
Mac Pro (2010), 12-core (12 thread @ 3.33 GHz, 24 thread @ 2.93 GHz), 16 GB RAM, 4 x 1 TB HW RAID
lshaner is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2012, 12:45 PM   #92
batmangorden
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Battery life was terrible on the last nano, don't know if it was cause how small the nano was, but yeah, terrible battery life. At times the battery only lasted around 4 hours. And that was lightly turning the screen on to change songs every once and a while.

Anyone gave the new nano's battery a test run?
__________________
iMac Mid 2010 27' i7 2.93 4GB - 4S 16 GB Black - 4S 16 GB White - Track Pad - Seagate 750GB HD
Sony 46' LED NX720 1080p 3D Smart TV Gorilla Glass
Nintendo Wii U 32GB Black
batmangorden is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2012, 01:01 PM   #93
PinkyMacGodess
macrumors 68000
 
PinkyMacGodess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Midwest America.
It's interesting that the Touch and the Nano got so close in functionality there for a while, and then drifted apart again... I can't see the Nano really working well for me. I've still got the earlier Nano, and am still getting used to it...
PinkyMacGodess is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2012, 01:21 PM   #94
Carlanga
macrumors 601
 
Carlanga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: PR
Quote:
Originally Posted by batmangorden View Post
Battery life was terrible on the last nano, don't know if it was cause how small the nano was, but yeah, terrible battery life. At times the battery only lasted around 4 hours. And that was lightly turning the screen on to change songs every once and a while.

Anyone gave the new nano's battery a test run?
The 6G nano has given me very good battery life and still does, way more than 4 hours.
__________________
☻ "A dream you dream alone is only a dream...
... A dream you dream together is reality." ☻
Carlanga is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2012, 06:20 PM   #95
Jessica Lares
macrumors 603
 
Jessica Lares's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Near Dallas, Texas, USA
Found a place to dock it!

Thumb resize.
__________________
Have You Hugged Your Mac Today?
Daily Expressions | iMac G4 | Late 2011 13" MacBook Pro | iPod Nano (7G) | iPad Mini | iPod Touch (5G) | iPhone 5S
Jessica Lares is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2012, 09:15 PM   #96
dba415
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Does anyone still buy the shuffle? There are a bunch of cheap MP3 players better and lower priced if you are in the price range.
dba415 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 14, 2012, 12:04 AM   #97
racoop
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by dba415 View Post
Does anyone still buy the shuffle? There are a bunch of cheap MP3 players better and lower priced if you are in the price range.
You're not a runner, are you?
racoop is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 14, 2012, 05:24 PM   #98
Ivabign
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
I know it is silly, but I liked that the 5th generation had a speaker - I KNOW it wasn't worth a damn - but I can't tell you how many times I watched Family Guy at a school function when it would have been difficult (appearance-wise) to have sported headphones.
Ivabign is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2012, 02:59 PM   #99
TacticalDesire
macrumors 68020
 
TacticalDesire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Michigan
For those with large hands and/or long fingers, the 6th gen nano was a pain to use and the 7th gen is a godsend.
TacticalDesire is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2012, 03:53 PM   #100
Guacamole
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
The reason I would like to get a nano is for when I want to listen to music on my long journey by bus and I don't want to waste my iPhones battery listening to music because the battery on my iphone doesn't last long and I'd rather save it
Guacamole is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > iPhone, iPod and iPad > iPod

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
iOS Update isn't Notifying Me And isn't Giving Me Red Badge on Settings App help? Dan50 iPhone Tips, Help and Troubleshooting 10 Apr 23, 2014 01:34 AM
Safari in iOS 7: great ideas but not great execution. iphnhelp iOS 7 43 Jul 15, 2013 01:46 PM
The great UK nano sim swap thedoofa iPhone 333 Oct 30, 2012 04:39 PM
The great CDN nano sim swap wysiwyg1972 iPhone 24 Sep 20, 2012 01:24 PM
WWDC 2012 Banners: "Where great ideas go on to do great things." MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 236 Jun 8, 2012 01:50 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:57 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC