iPod nano Dissected

Discussion in 'iPod' started by Lacero, Sep 8, 2005.

  1. macrumors 604

    Lacero

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    #1
  2. macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #2
    well that certainly was fast!! wasn't expecting this for maybe another week... or few days at least.
     
  3. macrumors 68020

    pdpfilms

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Location:
    Vermontana
    #3
    holy crap. How the... what.... but the i... and...
     
  4. macrumors 68020

    pdpfilms

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Location:
    Vermontana
    #4
    WAIT!!!!
    HOLDUP!!!
    That's a Microdrive.... Microdrives aren't flash based...

    SOMEBODY CALL 911!!!!

    EDIT: Now i'm really confused... is the second player not an iPod nano?
     
  5. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2004
    #5
    It's just there for size comparison I'm sure.
     
  6. macrumors 68040

    Daveway

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Location:
    New Orleans / Lafayette, La
    #6
    It's a comparison to the mini. So no, the second is a mini, believe me I've been inside one already.
    I'm surprised how basic it is on the inside.

    NOTES:
    -battery makes it elongated.
    -like the shuffle, the nano uses a daughter-card for memory.
    -memory is being supplied by Samsung.
    -battery has been in production for about a month.
    -battery is Li-ion polymer like the original ipod.
    -USB2 only transfers.
     
  7. macrumors 68040

    Scarlet Fever

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2005
    Location:
    Bookshop!
    #7
    whhhaaaattt.... u serious?!?

    aight the best thing in my sit is firewire. passing that USB1.1 is my only option. do you mean to say my computer is obsolete?!? i need to buy a new comp just so i can transfer music to an ipod nano?!? screw that im gettin a shuffle. stuff the screen.
     
  8. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    #8
    very interesting, i wonder how the small screen effects useability?
     
  9. Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    Whakatane, New Zealand
    #9
    Steve said something to the effect of "the nano is compatible with the universe of iPod accessories". Surely the Dock<->FireWire cable is an iPod accessory!
     
  10. macrumors Core

    Dagless

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    Darkplace Hospital
    #10
    hm i dunno about that. one of the photos says the its not compatible with Firewire.

    this is strange. why not FireWire? is it too powerful for the wee Nano i wonder, those delicate flash chips and all.
     
  11. Guest

    caveman_uk

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Location:
    Hitchin, Herts, UK
    #11
    The shuffle is USB only as well.
     
  12. thread starter macrumors 604

    Lacero

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    #12
    Pwned.
     
  13. Moderator emeritus

    WinterMute

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Location:
    London, England
    #13
    Might be wrong here, but isn't USB 2 backwards compatible with USB 1, you just don't get the transfer speeds from the original drivers is all....

    Still, who'd want to transfer 4Gb at USB 1 speeds? :rolleyes:
     
  14. macrumors 601

    mrgreen4242

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    #14
    It will still work, USB2 devices work fine in USB1.1 ports, they are just slow. You can get a USB2 card for like $15-20 if you have an open PCI slot. Otherwise you are gonna be stuck with slower transfer speeds or no nano.

    Ok, to the subject at hans, that was fast. Those weren't supposed to be in store until today at the earliest, it must be either a demo model or snagged off the line or something!

    The battery looks a lot like several cell phone batteries I have seen. I'm not saying it is the same as anything else out there, just that it looks very similiar is size and shape.

    The interior, is as commented, amazingly simple and clean. Too bad the battery is soldered in there. I am really suprised that Apple would do that, considering all the hullabalu about their batteries being non user repalceable, etc etc. Other than that it looks like it would be easy to swap the battery out, much moreso than the mini was. (That's assuming the case is moderately easy to open and reseal). At least the solder points look fairly large and somewhat isolated on the end of the board. Won't be TOO bad of a job replacing it.

    Hm, unless there is a connector on the battery itself? I can't really see in any of those pics... it doesn't look like in this pic, but I could be wrong. I suppose that replacement bettery kits cuold have you cut the wires close to the battery and splice in, but I wouldn't trust that around all those electronics and in such a tight space.

    It's actually not THAT bad. I mean, the initial sync will suck, but after that there is a good chance that MOST people will only be swapping between half and one gig at any given sync. At a realistic sustained transfer rate of 1.5 mBYTE per second for USB1.1 you can swap a full gig out in 10-11 minutes, not great, but not horrible. After the initial 45-50 minute load up, you only need 5-10 min to adjust what you are carrying with you.

    Also, on most PCs the USB2 transfer rates are only abotu 10% lower than FW400. The crappy USB2 performance on most Macs is not indicitive of USB2's potential. For moving 4gbs of data USB2 is more than enough on a PC, and tolerable on a Mac. (See barefeats.com - a Mac testing site - for some numbers on USB vs FW).

    Wow, I'm wordy this morning. Anyways, thanks for the link, that was indeed impressively fast!
     
  15. macrumors 68020

    rockthecasbah

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Location:
    Moorestown, NJ
    #15
    i don't get it, what prevents you from just using an old firewire iPod connector, it uses the same pin that the bottom...aren't they saying it just doesn't come with USB 2.0...as for the shuffle, of course it would only be USB 2.0, it is in essence a thumbdrive... :p
     
  16. Moderator emeritus

    robbieduncan

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    London
    #16
    It's been stated in numerous on-line articles that it's not compatable with the Photo Connector so I imagine there are a number of accessories that do not work :(
     
  17. macrumors G4

    Mord

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    Old York
    #17
    good the photo connector is trash, it's dead slow.

    also it may be usb only because flash drives have the usb controller built in, ever seen a firewire jump drive?
     
  18. macrumors 68030

    crazzyeddie

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    #18
    Yes.
     
  19. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    #19
    the fact that there's no hardware/firmware on the ipod nano to do anything useful with the firewire. so yes, you can physically hook it up, and probably even charge the nano, but if the electronics on the nano don't support firewire, it simply won't work. there's a lot more to it than simply making the connector fit.
     
  20. macrumors 6502a

    AoWolf

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Location:
    Daytona Beach
    #20
    Wow I was betting on 3 days but this is just crazy. Its just so tiny...
     
  21. macrumors 601

    mrgreen4242

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    #21
    Look at the pictures in the dissection link... specifically this one. Read what the screen on the nano says. They left out the FW bridge completely. You can charge it from the 5v line (or is it 3.3?) on a FW cable, but thats it.

    They probably did this for space and cost reasons. I am guessing that they used the same chips/circuitry/design from the shuffle for data transfers AND HOPING they did for audio playback as well; the shuffle sounds so very good.
     
  22. thread starter macrumors 604

    Lacero

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    #22
    I was looking more at that battery warning. Who's going to read that? It essentially means you shouldn't keep the nano in a locked car in the summer, or else you risk an explosion at the worst and severely shortened battery life at the best.
     
  23. macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #23
    yeah you know my car gets up to 140F quite easily :rolleyes:
     
  24. macrumors 601

    mrgreen4242

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    #24
    I bet it does, parked in the summer sun with the windows closed. See here. They say that on a 90f day your car can get up to 150F within an hour.
     
  25. macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #25
    thanks for the link, interesting.... ill have to think about this one, but for the most part it hardly reaches that high around here, although this summer was an exception.
     

Share This Page