Apple Announces All-New iPod Models: Shuffle, Nano and Touch

[chris975d]

I like the new Nano and will be buying one. I never used the video or camera on my Nano 5g....and never watched videos on it either. I found it to be a little awkward size wise, even though it was very slim, I just couldn't find a comfortable way to wear it. I liked the radio and that is had enough space to hold my whole library.

My shuffle was brilliant size wise and very easy to use. I also like the easy way to clip it on and wear it. Perfect device for tunes while riding my motorcycle. I just wished I had more control of the music and more space.

The new Nano is perfect for my personal needs....don't need that camera or video, small form factor with clip to wear easy, and more control over my music than the shuffle...plus enough space to hold my whole library, which is only 12gb anyway.

For me, the new Nano is in for the win! I'll be buying one.

You sound exactly like I do. I pre-ordered the new Nano the second the store came back up, because now I can combine the features I actually use in my 3rd gen Shuffle and 5th gen Nano into one device. Never used the video camera or watched video on the Nano, but want more control over my Shuffle's music when in the gym. I use every other feature of my 5th gen Nano except anything to do with video, which is all the stuff the new Nano keeps.

That being said, I understand that a lot of people will miss/want the features that the now "last gen" Nano (the 5th gen) had. That's why I think the new touchscreen Nano really should have been introduced in between the Shuffle and Nano, as more of a "Shuffle + (Plus)". It really is like a pimped out Shuffle (which is exactly what I've wanted).

 

[dampfnudel]

You sound exactly like I do. I pre-ordered the new Nano the second the store came back up, because now I can combine the features I actually use in my 3rd gen Shuffle and 5th gen Nano into one device. Never used the video camera or watched video on the Nano, but want more control over my Shuffle's music when in the gym. I use every other feature of my 5th gen Nano except anything to do with video, which is all the stuff the new Nano keeps.

That being said, I understand that a lot of people will miss/want the features that the now "last gen" Nano (the 5th gen) had. That's why I think the new touchscreen Nano really should have been introduced in between the Shuffle and Nano, as more of a "Shuffle + (Plus)". It really is like a pimped out Shuffle (which is exactly what I've wanted).

Maybe the market for a "pimped out" shuffle is bigger than I think and Apple knows what they're doing.

 

[Rootus]

Maybe the market for a "pimped out" shuffle is bigger than I think and Apple knows what they're doing.

It's been a while since they were wrong.

Personally I find the new Nano very tempting. I already have an iPhone 4, so the Touch doesn't offer me anything, and the shuffle has too little storage and too little control for my taste. The Nano has everything I'd want for the gym (including that FM radio tuner), and it's nearly as small as the shuffle. Things like video don't matter at all to me when I'm at the gym.

 

[pyth]

46% smaller on the Nano. Who cares? The constant need for Apple to miniaturize their products into uselessness is starting to wear on me.

This should be an iTouch Nano. This is what Apple should have done and kept the original Nano's basic specs. I've officially bought my last Nano. Sad.

Good news is that there are probably deals to be had on last year's Nano models.

You and me both, friend. You and me both. I was wholly disappointed by this keynote. Apparently Jobs & Co. realized that people didn't like the shuffle without buttons, so they decided to put them back on the shuffle and remove them from the Nano? Really?

 

[chris975d]

It's been a while since they were wrong.

Personally I find the new Nano very tempting. I already have an iPhone 4, so the Touch doesn't offer me anything, and the shuffle has too little storage and too little control for my taste. The Nano has everything I'd want for the gym (including that FM radio tuner), and it's nearly as small as the shuffle. Things like video don't matter at all to me when I'm at the gym.

That's what I'm saying. I think the product definitely has a market, but I think that they were wrong in replacing the Nano product line with it. It's everything that a lot of people want in a wearable mp3 player, but that's what it should have been introduced as. A Shuffle+ or a whole new line altogether. The Nano should have been kept relatively as is, as a successor to the iPod Classic when they finally kill off disk-based players and the price of flash storage gets reasonable enough that they could have a 32/64Gb or more Nano (in a design along the lines of the 5th gen Nano).

 

[840quadra]

Yes. This is it:

1.) Lower contrast ration.
2.) Weaker colors.
3.) Smaller viewing angle.

Have a look at the website:

iPhone Display

* Retina display
* 3.5-inch (diagonal) widescreen Multi-Touch display
* 960-by-640-pixel resolution at 326 ppi
* 800:1 contrast ratio (typical)
* 500 cd/m2 max brightness (typical)
* Fingerprint-resistant oleophobic coating on front and back
* Support for display of multiple languages and characters simultaneously

iPod Touch Display

* 3.5-inch (diagonal) widescreen Multi-Touch display
* 960-by-640-pixel resolution at 326 pixels per inch

So you are basing your opinion on the lack of information posted by Apple? For the record, the tech specs on the iPhone say nothing about it being an IPS display either.

Were is the contrast ratio posted for the iPod new touch? You say it is lower than the iPhone, but provide no details showing what it is.


Were is the viewing angle posted for the iPhone, or iPod touch? You say the iPod touch has lower viewing angles, but again provide no details.

Were are the color.... nevermind they don't exist for either device.

Judging by hands on photos / videos posted on the net regarding the the iPod Touch. It appears to have similar contrast ratio, and great viewing angles. Pictures also appear to show that the glass is either anti glare, or has some kind of coating (possibly oleophobic??).

Regardless, until we see a detailed comparison posted, or more detailed tech specs, lets leave our observations on the table , as opposed to pinning them on the fact board. You may be 100% correct, however I don't see anything published to support the claims you are making.

 

[daneoni]

Yes. This is it:

1.) Lower contrast ration.
2.) Weaker colors.
3.) Smaller viewing angle.

Have a look at the website:

iPhone Display

* Retina display
* 3.5-inch (diagonal) widescreen Multi-Touch display
* 960-by-640-pixel resolution at 326 ppi
* 800:1 contrast ratio (typical)
* 500 cd/m2 max brightness (typical)
* Fingerprint-resistant oleophobic coating on front and back
* Support for display of multiple languages and characters simultaneously

iPod Touch Display

* 3.5-inch (diagonal) widescreen Multi-Touch display
* 960-by-640-pixel resolution at 326 pixels per inch

Sucks

 

[It's a tribute]

In all respect the new Nano looks like a downgrade.

 

[MacVault]

You want an iPhone and either can't afford it or are too cheap. Deal....

I do NOT want an iPhone for which I must pay monthly to use! Why should I have to pay monthly to use GPS?

 

[daneoni]

So you are basing your opinion on the lack of information posted by Apple? For the record, the tech specs on the iPhone say nothing about it being an IPS display either.

Not in tech specs but in features

Also if there was IPS technology on the Touch Apple would sure as hell push it marketing wise. The fact that they didn't would suggest it simply isn't there.

 

[powers74]

bad move

This Nano rev. is the new third gen Shuffle. They have to go wide screen and put a camera back on it. The square format and screen bevel along with the rounded edges just make for an awkward package as some (including myself) predicted. Why don't they just call it the iPodShuffleTouch?

Funny how we joked about a touch screen shuffle years ago.

 

[mashinhead]

this was a pretty lame update. No higher capacities. No cheaper prices. Really just redesigns. And the iPod Nano, looks horrible. Doesn't even look like something apple would design. The black bezel shape conflicts with the nano shape.

The software updates were nice however.

 

[kalsta]

For video that was in the nano, the touch is designed to replace it. The reason why the video capability was removed has already been stated: currently the iPod touch is their biggest selling iPod. Apple sees the writing that the future of the iPod is the touch (not the classic, not the nano), and is relegating the nano to a niche device. My guess is people weren't buying the new Nano because it added video capability. Video isn't compelling and Apple things Facetime (and iMovie editing+ flickr/youtube wireless uploads) will change that.

Right. I was going to make a similar observation. Back when Apple first added video to the Nano and not the Touch, I thought it was a very odd decision — one they've rectified now. You can argue about the price, but making the Nano a music player with a simple touchscreen interface makes sense to me. There is now a more logical progression of features through from their entry level device, the Shuffle, through to the Nano, iPod Touch, and finally the iPhone.

 

[matt550]

When will the new nano be in stores? I never used the camera or watched videos. I left 5th gen at the gym a few months ago, so I need a new one.

 

[kalsta]

Was there any word on apps for the iPod Nano? Or do you just get the handful of built-ins?

I was thinking the same thing. The new Nano OS looks to be based on iOS, but I'm guessing without the ability to run third-party apps. Perhaps the mistake here was Apple still calling it a Nano. It's a very different device now.

 

[Master Chief]

So you are basing your opinion on the lack of information posted by Apple? For the record, the tech specs on the iPhone say nothing about it being an IPS display either.

You may want to read this:

LED backlighting.

The Retina display includes LED backlighting and an ambient light sensor that automatically adjusts the brightness of the screen for the best viewing and battery life possible. So you can focus on more important things. Like destroying aliens.

Source: http://www.apple.com/ipodtouch/features/retina-display.html

Brilliant, no matter how you look at it.

The iPhone 4 Retina display uses technology called IPS (in-plane switching) — the same technology used in the Apple LED Cinema Display and iPad — to achieve a wider viewing angle than on typical LCDs. Which means you can hold iPhone 4 almost any way you want and still get a brilliant picture. That’s perfect when you’re sharing photos with a friend or moving your iPhone around while playing a driving or flying game. In addition, the Retina display offers four times the contrast ratio of previous models, so whites are brighter, blacks are darker, and everything is more beautiful.

Source: http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/retina-display.html

Not that difficult, is it?

Were is the contrast ratio posted for the iPod new touch? You say it is lower than the iPhone, but provide no details showing what it is.

Were is the viewing angle posted for the iPhone, or iPod touch? You say the iPod touch has lower viewing angles, but again provide no details.

Were are the color.... nevermind they don't exist for either device.

Oh sorry. I thought that this was obvious. Feel free to visit wikipedia and do some background reading.

Judging by hands on photos / videos posted on the net regarding the the iPod Touch. It appears to have similar contrast ratio, and great viewing angles. Pictures also appear to show that the glass is either anti glare, or has some kind of coating (possibly oleophobic??).

Regardless, until we see a detailed comparison posted, or more detailed tech specs, lets leave our observations on the table , as opposed to pinning them on the fact board. You may be 100% correct, however I don't see anything published to support the claims you are making.

You may not belief it [me] but this is it. Display panel technology is wide in the open, even for you to read and check my findings. Have fun.

 

[apple101]

Wi-Fi Antenna

They removed the Wi-Fi antenna from the back of iPod touch. Is in inside now? Noticed it on apple.com where iPod touch is under.

 

[Masquerade]

they could make a earphones with clickwheel or a clickwheel acessory. this would be nice for people running or biking

 

[840quadra]

Not in tech specs but in features

Also if there was IPS technology on the Touch Apple would sure as hell push it marketing wise. The fact that they didn't would suggest it simply isn't there.

That is a great point, however Apple may see the iPod touch and the iPhone as being for different markets. This would make them highlight some features on one product over the other. The iPhone 3GS was near the same hardware as the iPod Touch 3rd generation, however, the iPod was marketed more to gaming, while the iPhone was marketed slightly more differently.

For the record, I wouldn't doubt that they made the iPod somewhat more cheaply, I just don't see anything in print (provided form Apple), or any solid evidence stating that the iPod Touch uses inferior display technology. I just see a lack of detail on the iPod spec sheet.

You may want to read this:

LED backlighting.

The Retina display includes LED backlighting and an ambient light sensor that automatically adjusts the brightness of the screen for the best viewing and battery life possible. So you can focus on more important things. Like destroying aliens.

Source: http://www.apple.com/ipodtouch/features/retina-display.html

Brilliant, no matter how you look at it.

The iPhone 4 Retina display uses technology called IPS (in-plane switching) — the same technology used in the Apple LED Cinema Display and iPad — to achieve a wider viewing angle than on typical LCDs. Which means you can hold iPhone 4 almost any way you want and still get a brilliant picture. That’s perfect when you’re sharing photos with a friend or moving your iPhone around while playing a driving or flying game. In addition, the Retina display offers four times the contrast ratio of previous models, so whites are brighter, blacks are darker, and everything is more beautiful.

Source: http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/retina-display.html

Not that difficult, is it?


Oh sorry. I thought that this was obvious. Feel free to visit wikipedia and do some background reading.


You may not belief it [me] but this is it. Display panel technology is wide in the open, even for you to read and check my findings. Have fun.

I am a photographer. I know well and good what IPS technology is. I have 3 monitors that have this technology so that I can produce color accurate photos for print. My education is not in question, your 'facts' are.

 

[OGDaniel]

I have like 7 old/newish iPods, and I don't need any more. But I just can't help me wanting every single new iPod, and god damnit i'm gonna waste a lot of money buying them. Curse you, Apple!

 

[iBug2]

iPod touch uses IPS display. Look at the slides Jobs is using. 24 bit color. That's only available in IPS displays.

 

[Master Chief]

I am a photographer. I know well and good what IPS technology is. I have 3 monitors that have this technology so that I can produce color accurate photos for print. My education is not in question, your 'facts' are.

Cool. So we have something in common. Great.

But what's the problem? You don't agree that the panels are different? This despite the fact that the info is readily available on the Apple website? Hey. I'm not making this up. Go have a look for yourself.

And I'm open for discussion, but please don't give me this: "My education is not in question, your 'facts' are." because the facts sir, are readily available on wikipedia. I didn't invent these panels, no, but I'm obviously not alone to come to this [preliminary] findings.

I may have given you a nod, a bad feeling, but that was most definitely not the context of my reply. You read it wrong

 

[WestCoastUser83]

The new Touch works for me

My 1st Gen (16 GB) touch is just about full of music, so I was needing to replace it and was waiting for the 4th Gen.

I like that the price for the new 4th Gen 32 GB is the same as the 3rd Gen. Seems like a good value/deal.

I'm not wild about the cameras - I see no really need since I can never find free Wi-Fi when out and about. But since the price stayed the same, not a real issue. I would have had heartburn if the price had gone up due to the cameras.

I would have liked 3/4G data service, like the iPads, but that was a dream.

All in all, the Touch is still the best pocket media/music player on the market, so I'll be placing my order on-line tomorrow.

 

[trellus]

Who would want to watch video on the new Nano anyway? It would probably make you go blind or something.

Um, actually, I have a legally blind friend who watches video podcasts quite frequently on his 2009 iPod Nano. Yes, it's tiny, but it's fine for getting the sense of what's on the screen even for someone visually impaired. Well.. it used to be before Apple stripped out of this year's model.

 

[rkw0211]

This is more about the keynote in general, and if what I am about to say has been mentioned, I apologize.

Did anyone notice that Steve Jobs said that the HDR feature would be coming to iPad? Hint at future iPad camera I believe.