Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Schnebar

macrumors 6502
Original poster
May 15, 2006
372
1
California


and the 8GB nano is 2,000 songs.

Is that because the os takes up 1GB?

and on the 16GB the os takes up 2GB

I know these are estimates and it depends on the song quality and length but it is still a large amount if the OS is taking up 2GB.

Anyways I ordered the 16GB and I am sooo excited for oct 2-4th
 

mikefly

macrumors regular
Jan 4, 2007
183
0
capacity

hmm.. in fact it is wierd -- touch has higher capacity video listed compared to nano -- and lower capacity music.

bizarre -- my guess is typos.

Mike
 

ikonq

macrumors member
Apr 30, 2006
59
0
hmm.. in fact it is wierd -- touch has higher capacity video listed compared to nano -- and lower capacity music.

bizarre -- my guess is typos.

Mike

Or the possibility that the iPod Touch has a larger Operating System than the iPod Nano, which seems likely and feasible to me.
 

WildCowboy

Administrator/Editor
Staff member
Jan 20, 2005
18,390
2,827
If they had said 1750 and 3750, you'd have people wondering why it's not double the storage for double the capacity. They can't win either way...
 

Schnebar

macrumors 6502
Original poster
May 15, 2006
372
1
California
If they had said 1750 and 3750, you'd have people wondering why it's not double the storage for double the capacity. They can't win either way...

No because then we could figure that the OS takes up the same space on both models.

Now they are saying that the OS takes up twice as much space on the 16GB

it has usually been 250 songs per GB with all the other iPods

There had to be some reason why they changed this for the touch.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.