This is the equivalent of a sock in a jock... ugly, out of proportion and fake as sh*t.
Obviously, this is being passed off as the real deal and not just a lame mock-up of someone's Nano fantasy/wetdream -- 'cause it's a " 'spy shot' from one of our sources". Sure. Right. Whatever.
We could talk about the quality (or lack thereof) of the photo in question. We could about the crappy (and obvious) Photoshop bevel added to these imposters. We also could talk about the crappy/terrible drop shadow that Apple would never use in an ad.
We could also talk about the fact that the window bar reveals that the image is a PSD... Photoshop Document.
We could talk all about these things, but I'd rather not. I'd rather talk about what's the most obvious problem with 9to5's fake-o-rama...
The FLOWER design.
In other words, the theme that they used with the original iMacs um... ten years ago.
Since Apple's big iMac/iLife/iWork unveil, we've all seen the new packaging for Apple's software suites iLife and iWork. 5 screens/documents that create kind of a pentagon or star -- some (cough, 9to5) might call it a Flower but it's a Star. Now, while it makes absolute sense to tie these two suites together so that people would naturally want to get PT. 1 and 2 of the software, it is completely implausible, to me at least, to think that not only would Apple use this new design composition in their two newest Software offerings, but that they would bring it on into some of the hardware ads.
No way.
Well, I won't say "never" but there are enough inconsistencies with Apple's industrial design themes at present that it doesn't quite make sense. Thematically, it looks like a return to the softer, more plastic-ish designs they churned out in 1998. Even if you remove the Photoshop bevel job out of the equation and think that this was indeed a design Apple had, it may have been one that they dropped a while ago.
When curved edges are undefined by a border, e.g. on the iPhone, and given a flat color, they lack depth and look REALLY cheap... even if the material used is, say, aluminum. Apple of today is more likely to steer clear of such Playskool design principles (though most American car manufacturers haven't figured this one out).
Additionally, the corner radius doesn't match Apple's apparent design principles. Look at the tighter corner radius of the iPhone and iMac. You might think this is trivial but back when the Mac Classic case was designed, they had specifications down to the millimeter for how many millimeters the front corner radii would be versus the rear case corner radii. They still apply design principles that aim toward a singular product or brand strategy... rather than away from it.
That being said, I could still be wrong if the dividing line between the "pro" look and the Playskool look is going to be below iPhone and iMac... that depends on what they've got coming out that is going to be positioned below the iMac line... and IMHO they do have such a product: Mobile Mac.
If Mobile Mac goes for a softer look to appeal to a younger set, and if a future lower-tier of iPhones are some soap-bar looking things all in one color instead of the much more expensive aluminum, glass and polished metal design, then this design is certainly plausible.
One last thing... while everyone is focusing on the scrollwheel being the common denominator, has anyone considered the possibility that it's the SCREEN that is the same size as the existing nano's? That would radically shrink the form factor of the nano.
