2GB - 500 Songs - Not enough?

Discussion in 'iPod' started by OCOTILLO, Sep 14, 2005.

  1. OCOTILLO macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #1
    2 GBs of songs equals 33 hours of listening. You would have to charge the battery 3 times to listen to all the songs once. You could refill with new playlists while charging. How is this inconvenient? What is the point of more storage? As I see it, the Nano is designed to be convenient to carry and listen while on the move. If storage is a big deal, the iPod is still there.

    Update: I thought about what I previously posted and I apparently talked myself into the 2GB nano. Because, I just got back from the Woodlands (near Houston) Apple store where i purchased the Black 2GB nano. They were all sold out of 4GBs both black and white. I also have a 40GB iPod Photo so storage is not a problem. Why did I buy the nano? - Because it is cool and I could.
     
  2. Mitthrawnuruodo Moderator emeritus

    Mitthrawnuruodo

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Location:
    Bergen, Norway
    #2
    Well, there are those who, for some insane or at least for me unknown reason, needs to carry all their music around all the time, but I'm with OCOTILLO, give me the ability to sync my favorite playlists and I'm more than happy. I rarely fill my 1G iPod mini with more than 6-700 songs (and would have small problems to cut that down to under 500 if I go for the 2 GB nano, whenever the mini needs replacing, unless of course 4GB is the smallest available whenever that is... ;))
     
  3. devilot Moderator emeritus

    devilot

    Joined:
    May 1, 2005
    #3
    I think that for some people it is about the 'principles' of the 2GB vs. 4GB nano-- for only $50 more you get double the storage. So why not?
     
  4. Piarco macrumors 68030

    Piarco

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Location:
    Londinium
    #4
    Thats exactly why I returned my 2GB to get a 4GB. I could put my favourite current and classic tracks onto a 2GB nano with a bit of trimming, but I prefer the extra room so I can put whole new albums on rather than trimming to what I consider to be the best tracks. The 4GB gives me a nice balance between size and amount of music.

    I've got a half full 60gigger for everything else ;)
     
  5. feakbeak macrumors 6502a

    feakbeak

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2003
    Location:
    Michigan
    #5
    I agree with you here. Since to get a nano you're already paying $200, why not fork over the extra $50 (only 25% more) for twice the capacity.

    I own a 20 GB 4G iPod that can no longer hold my entire library of music - especially now with podcasts. So instead of sync'ing my entire library I have a smart playlist used to filter out stuff I probably won't listen to much on the go - christmas music, classical, etc. Having all of my library with me would be nice, but not having it all with me hasn't really affected my listening habits in any way. I'm sure I could get by with a 4 GB nano just keeping my current favorite albums with me. My 1 GB Shuffle holds quite a bit of music (IMO) and it's great for working out. Now with the nano you can have a tiny, flash-based player that's great for being active AND have the ability to use playlists and pick whatever song/album you want to hear. Plus you get a nice, higher-res color screen. Even with a 2 GB capacity this should work for most people's needs. No product or product line is going to meet everyone's needs - there will always be people with very specific requests that won't be satisfied.

    I don't get the 2/4 GB is not enough argument either. If you need more space then buy a normal iPod with 20 or 60 GB of space and be quiet. If you expect the nano to have 20 or 60 GB - well, I don't know who wouldn't mind that, but it's not technologically possible yet so stop complaining and wait - it'll happen in a few years.
     
  6. devilot Moderator emeritus

    devilot

    Joined:
    May 1, 2005
    #6
    Yes, I was starting to think seriously about getting a 512MB shuffle for when I go for walks/jogs but was a bit bummed about not having playlists because let's face it; sometimes you feel like listening to more intense, pulsating, driving music-- and other times, you want something chill and mellow.

    Then the nano came out... and I fell in love. You get a super light, tiny, player, w/ playlists and a stopwatch/lap counter!!! Not to mention, it is flash-based, no worried of ruining a spinning HD.

    Sigh. Now, I've just gotta save up that darned money. :eek:
     
  7. cube macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #7
    If you have a ton of music and you fill one of the wimpy iPods randomly every day because you hate to make playlists, there's more chance of having enough songs that you actually want to hear if the capacity is bigger.
     
  8. dops7107 macrumors 6502a

    dops7107

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2005
    Location:
    Perth, Oztrailya
    #8
    Exactly - the problem with limited space is that you have to be choosy, perhaps before you know what it is you want to listen to! Granted though, 4 GB is a fair chunk of music. The sweet spot is 10 GB I think, but I could be waiting a while and paying a premium for a Nano that size.
     
  9. feakbeak macrumors 6502a

    feakbeak

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2003
    Location:
    Michigan
    #9
    15,000 songs in your pocket
     
  10. Mitthrawnuruodo Moderator emeritus

    Mitthrawnuruodo

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Location:
    Bergen, Norway
    #10
    I never said I filled my mini randomly, I use a number of smart and normal playlists, which is basically my favorites among the playlists I use whenever I play music from iTunes over AirTunes at home.

    Only one of those playlists pick randomly among songs I've rated with 3 or more stars that I haven't listened to in a week, and that's just a "helper" playlist used by another (more complex) smart playlist. Most of my favorites are taken care of by regular playlists.

    I've actually never wanted to hear one specific of my almost 10.000 tracks and found that it wasn't among the 6-700 on my iPod mini.
     
  11. mrgreen4242 macrumors 601

    mrgreen4242

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    #11
    Being to lazy to make playlists isn't an excuse for why a product isn't any good. Especially with iTunes; the smart playlists and automatic syncing options make it incredibly easy to practically gaurantee that you will have what you want to listen to today just by plugging in your iPod before you go to sleep. It's the best music management and syncing system out there, bar none.

    I am going to say that I think 4gb is the sweet spot. It's enough room to have a fairly large collection of music on hand at any time (say 500 songs = 2000 minutes = 33 hours) and still have tons of space to add audio books, podcasts, and room to toss on a few new CDs "by hand".

    My 4gb mini has a mix similar to that = 500 songs, 7 audio books, 7 podcasts with about 4 episodes of each, and I have about 75mb free, which is plenty of room for an entire CD if I feel like adding something on there quick without taking any time to choose what I want to get rid of.
     
  12. homerjward macrumors 68030

    homerjward

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Location:
    fig tree
    #12
    to me (i have a 15gb) it's not that i can't listen to 3750 songs on 4hr battery life, it's that i dont know at the time i load songs onto it what i'm going to want to listen to when i'm actually using it. i can say one night "ill load x, y, and z playlists" but then the next day im out somewhere and i want to listen to playlist w. i hope that made sense...:eek:
     
  13. neocell macrumors 65816

    neocell

    Joined:
    May 23, 2005
    Location:
    Great White North
    #13
    Yeah, you really only need 1 to 2 GB for music on an iPod unless you're going on a very long trip and only bringing your charging cables with you. But I use my 20 GB iPod to backup all my work files and such, and I need at least 6 GB to do that. So, along with the other posted replies of more memory for a few extra bucks, and some neurotic tendencies to have every single song, I really like to have the functionality of a backup/storage drive, which there's no way I'd get with a 2 GB nano, nor a 4. Guess I'll have to wait for the new chips next year and hope for the 16 GB nano
     
  14. mrgreen4242 macrumors 601

    mrgreen4242

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    #14
    Using your iPod as a backdrive is a perfect example of who NEEDS a 60gb unit! It's great combination of getting something practical and useful that you actually need and in the process getting a really fun/usefull/cool toy.

    You have probably been the only person I have ever seen who has made a compelling reason for why they actually need a full sized (read: large capacity) iPod.
     
  15. shadowmoses macrumors 68000

    shadowmoses

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    #15
    I would get a 2gb Nano the only thing stopping me is the fact that for $50 i can get double the storage, this plays on my mind and makes me plump for the 4gb, The other reason i would go for the 4gb is that apple are likely to make the rev B Nano 4gb and 6gb, making the 4gb REV A seem like it is not outdated whereas the 2gb Rev A would seem outdated,I know this is an odd persective but its the way my head works,

    ShadOW
     
  16. Ashapalan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Location:
    England
    #16
    i think that having a smaller capacity ipod is benificial to my music habits.

    With my 30gig ipod, i easily fall into habits of listening to my favourite tracks off every album, rather than anything else on the same 1 album. However, with my ipod shuffle i just put one album on it, and then have to listen to it. I find out about songs that i'd long forgotten about.
     
  17. bankshot macrumors 65816

    bankshot

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Location:
    Southern California
    #17
    Exactly. It's about having the option to choose anything in your collection at a moment's notice while out and about. I just can't have that with only a subset of my music library in my portable device. While I know it's not the typical usage pattern, it was a very common occurrence for me (before my iPod was stolen :(), and it's why I'll never buy a nano or shuffle.

    Unless, of course, they fix the gap problem in those models and not the full iPod. :rolleyes:

    Before the iPod came out, I used to have a portable MP3-CD player which I loved. But I used to agonize over what to put on my CDs, since I could "only" fit at most about 150 songs. Doubly so because changing the songs meant burning a new CD. Since I got my first iPod, I swore I'd never go back.
     
  18. thejakill macrumors 6502

    thejakill

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    #18
    i have a 40 gb ipod that holds all my music. i use this mostly at home.
    i also have a 512 mb shuffle that i use for working out and driving to work.

    i ordered a 2 gb nano to replace the shuffle for my work pod. didn't really need it, but really wanted one. now the shuffle will stay for working out and i'll have more music for work.

    i didn't need the 4 gb, really, and i didn't need to spend more and wait a lot longer for one.
     

Share This Page