Touch screen iPods suck if you're trying to drive, use it at the gym, or ski/snowboard with it on. I NEED a click wheel iPod, and I want new features on it! Apple, please don't screw over the interface that got you where you are today!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Claimed Next-Generation iPod Nano Cases Offer Hints at Device's Physical Features
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Touch screen iPods suck if you're trying to drive, use it at the gym, or ski/snowboard with it on. I NEED a click wheel iPod, and I want new features on it! Apple, please don't screw over the interface that got you where you are today!
eye
macrumors 6502a
TimTheEnchanter
macrumors 6502a
And NOWHERE did he say they wear them on their wrists either.... just want to make that clear. 😛
DavidLeblond
macrumors 68020
2 things. First of all, the original Apple TV wasn't groundbreaking, and they knew it. It was merely a "oh yeah, here's something for your TV." Second, yes that was an "iPod Event" but the invite for it was "It's Showtime".... clearly an emphasis on movies. This one is a guitar. Clearly an emphasis on music. The invite always gives a glimpse on the content of the show, at least it has so far.
I don't get what you are saying... he made a sarcastic comment basically saying that those three people don't wear them. I googled their names and easily found out that they do in fact wear watches thus proving his comment wrong.
TimTheEnchanter
macrumors 6502a
I'm just saying just because you can't see them wearing a watch doesn't mean they aren't. 😉
I believe those earbuds are the same ones shipping with all iDevices.
In any case, this rumored iPod nano would have the same tactile controls as the current iPod touch: volume and hold. If they move to a touchscreen nano, the user interaction would be very similar to that of the iPod touch (for playing music).
this has to be the new shuffle, since the last one suck. what can you do on this tiny screen except listening to music on the go.
Safari???
What genius put a Safari app icon on that mockup? Safari on that miniscule screen? -- Give me a flippin' break!
Also, why is everyone so dang convinced this will replace either the nano or shuffle or even both??? I mean, that could well be true (how should I know), but why can't this just be a NEW iPod device???? Seriously.
Maybe they WILL drop the shuffle. I think that would be ashame for some people who just need an indestructable, largely hands-and-eyeballs free device... for sports, working out, or just grab-n-go messing around. But this looks like no substitute for the shuffle users.
Maybe they'd even drop the nano. (Again, I don't know). But i think, from my anecdotal experience, the classic would be on the chopping block long before the nano. People I know seem to have/love nanos. I don't have one myself. I have 1st & 2nd gen shuffles, 2nd gen iPod touch (which was the gateway drug for...), & an iPhone 3GS. But I've been tempted for a LONG time to buy a nano (except when they went thru that stubby phase) just because they look so damn beautiful and seem so functional (16 GB of music not having to share space with apps and photos etc).
I've said this before, but to me, it just seems that the current nano IS the new classic iPod. It is the most iconic and fun-looking iPod IMHO. Is it possible to cram 64 or 128 GB of flash memory into a current-sized nano??? (Or will it be in the next year or so?) Becuase if that happens, I'd think the current nano (with natural revisions/updates... maybe even a touchscreen with virtual clickwheel) will replace the classic. I just don't see this rumored square device as a nano replacement. Wouldn't the storage size be drastically limited in such a device? (But again, not like I really know what Apple will do!)
I understand everyone talks about Apple keeping their product lines (i.e. consumer choices) slim and trim, but over the past few years they've introduced the Apple TV (whatever one may think of it), the MacBook Air, the iPhone, the iPod touch, and the iPad... none of which previously existed or "replaced" a product in Apple's lineup. So why do I feel like the ONLY one thinking this hypothetical tiny square iPod is a NEW item altogether??? (I know, because I'm crazy and will be proven wrong in 2 days... LOL).
But seriously, I think the iPod classic is dead. Maybe not in two days. But sooner or later, dead. I think it would be a mistake to kill the current nano. Maybe the classic will be retired Wednesday and iPod nano will be redubbed simply "iPod" or "iPod classic" (its second name change). Or maybe the classic won't even be mentioned, iPod nanos will stay roughly the same,... and the new square thing will be the "iPod nanonano" =)
My money (pretend money) is still on "iWatch" or "iPod Watch" or some variant. A new thing. Not a redesigned thing. Last week some were suggesting the thing might have FaceTime, and I jumped on board calling it the "iPod FaceTime", but now I'm not so sure... Can Apple cram a front-facing camera and wifi and bluetooth into that little square????
What genius put a Safari app icon on that mockup? Safari on that miniscule screen? -- Give me a flippin' break!
Also, why is everyone so dang convinced this will replace either the nano or shuffle or even both??? I mean, that could well be true (how should I know), but why can't this just be a NEW iPod device???? Seriously.
Maybe they WILL drop the shuffle. I think that would be ashame for some people who just need an indestructable, largely hands-and-eyeballs free device... for sports, working out, or just grab-n-go messing around. But this looks like no substitute for the shuffle users.
Maybe they'd even drop the nano. (Again, I don't know). But i think, from my anecdotal experience, the classic would be on the chopping block long before the nano. People I know seem to have/love nanos. I don't have one myself. I have 1st & 2nd gen shuffles, 2nd gen iPod touch (which was the gateway drug for...), & an iPhone 3GS. But I've been tempted for a LONG time to buy a nano (except when they went thru that stubby phase) just because they look so damn beautiful and seem so functional (16 GB of music not having to share space with apps and photos etc).
I've said this before, but to me, it just seems that the current nano IS the new classic iPod. It is the most iconic and fun-looking iPod IMHO. Is it possible to cram 64 or 128 GB of flash memory into a current-sized nano??? (Or will it be in the next year or so?) Becuase if that happens, I'd think the current nano (with natural revisions/updates... maybe even a touchscreen with virtual clickwheel) will replace the classic. I just don't see this rumored square device as a nano replacement. Wouldn't the storage size be drastically limited in such a device? (But again, not like I really know what Apple will do!)
I understand everyone talks about Apple keeping their product lines (i.e. consumer choices) slim and trim, but over the past few years they've introduced the Apple TV (whatever one may think of it), the MacBook Air, the iPhone, the iPod touch, and the iPad... none of which previously existed or "replaced" a product in Apple's lineup. So why do I feel like the ONLY one thinking this hypothetical tiny square iPod is a NEW item altogether??? (I know, because I'm crazy and will be proven wrong in 2 days... LOL).
But seriously, I think the iPod classic is dead. Maybe not in two days. But sooner or later, dead. I think it would be a mistake to kill the current nano. Maybe the classic will be retired Wednesday and iPod nano will be redubbed simply "iPod" or "iPod classic" (its second name change). Or maybe the classic won't even be mentioned, iPod nanos will stay roughly the same,... and the new square thing will be the "iPod nanonano" =)
My money (pretend money) is still on "iWatch" or "iPod Watch" or some variant. A new thing. Not a redesigned thing. Last week some were suggesting the thing might have FaceTime, and I jumped on board calling it the "iPod FaceTime", but now I'm not so sure... Can Apple cram a front-facing camera and wifi and bluetooth into that little square????
iSee
macrumors 68040
I'm guessing no to all... I think the only way apple could make it so small is to cut out all the extras. This is a back to basics iPod that is all about audio playback and nothing else: no camera, no video, no mic, definitely no navigation or apps, etc.
Wi-fi would be nice for streaming and wireless syncing, but I'm guessing that would make it too big and use too much power...
Likewise it should have bluetooth and an FM tuner... But you know Apple.
We should get 2 of 3 (bluetooth, FM tuner, wifi), but its more likely we'll get 1/3 or 0/3.
Interesting theory. But would Apple really re-badge the nano with its original "mini" moniker. From a marketing POV, that seems a bit off to me.
I'm predicting, if the current-shaped nano lives, and it is re-named (now or ever), it will simply be called "iPod" or "iPod classic". (Obviously the later name would only work if the hard-drive based classic is retired).
Yes please!
When I saw the first 3cm^2 touch screen part I thought that it would be great to have a watchstrap case for it like this.
I love my 2G Shuffle, the size and functionality is cool and easy to use. I thought about upgrading to the 3G but it was not different enough to make the jump worthwhile ... if this becomes a shuffle/nano hybrid it would be really neat and I'd jump now even for $150.
Imagine if this had bluetooth (for headset or tethering) or wifi (for remote control apps) onboard and had a version of iOS which could run mini-apps and 8Gb/16Gb .. now that would be cool.
When I saw the first 3cm^2 touch screen part I thought that it would be great to have a watchstrap case for it like this.
I love my 2G Shuffle, the size and functionality is cool and easy to use. I thought about upgrading to the 3G but it was not different enough to make the jump worthwhile ... if this becomes a shuffle/nano hybrid it would be really neat and I'd jump now even for $150.
Imagine if this had bluetooth (for headset or tethering) or wifi (for remote control apps) onboard and had a version of iOS which could run mini-apps and 8Gb/16Gb .. now that would be cool.
How the heck can this be the new nano? The nano has a camera. Releasing this is being counter productive. I am sure it is either the iPod Shuffle replacement or a new line of iPods.
iSee
macrumors 68040
Oh brother. I'm not sure why you think anyone needs to justify wearing a watch to you. People have all kinds of junk they don't strictly need for a real purpose. E.g., a lot of us on this site buy a lot of Apple gear we don't really have a practical purpose for. Personally I feel I can do just fine without the respect of people that would form such a strong judgement about something so inconsequential. I don't actually wear a watch, but I would if I felt like it.
Megagator
macrumors regular
Oh lord! I thought I was the only one barking up this tree! Thank you for making me feel slightly less nutty. =)
I'm not sure why they'd drop the shuffle though, as a touch screen device seems like the wrong evolutionary direction for the shuffle and a non-replacement for a shuffle... Unless it can be used 100% eyeballs-free and Steve can guarantee the device's indestructability! Of course, they might drop the shuffle "just because" (Apple doesn't cater to everyone's needs, of course).
But other than that minor point, yeah, yeah, and yeah! This looks to me like something entirely NEW, not a redesign of an existing product. If marketing DOES decide it is best to call it a "nano", I still think the current nano stays in the lineup, but under a different name (iPod or iPod classic). But even IF Apple "shuffles" (pun intended, sorry) some names around, that still makes this essentially a NEW iDevice/iPod.
