iFixit Takes the New iPod Nano Apart

[MacRumors]

iFixit has gotten its disassembling hands on the latest iPod Nano and taken it apart piece by piece. They discovered the new 7th Generation Nano, introduced on Tuesday, is very similar to the prior version.

The most difficult part of the teardown was removing the display which "requires the use of a heat gun, as there is a lot of adhesive holding it in place." Once the display is removed, though, disassembly is pretty straightforward.

There were software changes between the old generation Nano and the new, but those changes are available to prior Nano owners via a software update. The new Nano's biggest feature is a reduced price. The 8GB version is now $129 and the 16GB model is $149, down from $149 and $179 respectively.

Article Link: iFixit Takes the New iPod Nano Apart

 

[r2shyyou]

The iFixit folks are awesome!

 

[SwiftLives]

So - is there any physical difference between the current and previous generation nanos? Is there any software difference?

 

[mms13]

So - is there any physical difference between the current and previous generation nanos? Is there any software difference?

If the answer to both of your questions was 'no', why would there even be a new generation?

 

[surf2snow1]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8L1 Safari/6533.18.5)

So - is there any physical difference between the current and previous generation nanos? Is there any software difference?

If the answer to both of your questions was 'no', why would there even be a new generation?

For the new clocks!

 

[applefan289]

All the new stuff Apple came out with 2 days ago consists of the following:

1.) new software for Nano
2.) iPhone 4S
3.) white iPod Touch
4.) lower prices for Nano and Touch.
5.) new website graphics.

That's it. The only real update was the 4S, which I'm fine with. I've never liked the Nano, and the Touch still looks great, so I don't see a need for anything to be added, except maybe an A5 chip should have been added, but that's about it. If they added anything though, the price would have to be higher than $199.

 

[TuffLuffJimmy]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en_US) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

Weren't these supposed to have a useless camera or something?

 

[MrXiro]

So - is there any physical difference between the current and previous generation nanos? Is there any software difference?

I'm happy I got mine when I did... I even got it for $127 for the 16gb! Still under the retail price after the drop!

 

[FoxHoundADAM]

So - is there any physical difference between the current and previous generation nanos? Is there any software difference?

I assume there is something new in there for the Nike+ stuff. that required a seperate attachment previously.

 

[Menge]

I assume there is something new in there for the Nike+ stuff. that required a seperate attachment previously.

My old nano now not only counts steps and calories, but estimates distance and pace - which it did not before - backed by a new sensor in iTunes.

I don't think there's any difference from previous gen nano to this latest nano.

 

[jsalda]

I assume there is something new in there for the Nike+ stuff. that required a seperate attachment previously.

I don't think so, I updated my 6th gen to the new software and the Nike+ stuff is there and seems to be fully functional, whereas previously I couldn't get to it unless the Nike receiver was plugged in. Haven't tested it without the receiver yet, but I would think that the only reason to use the receiver was to get a little more accurate readings of your run.

 

[Steve Ballmer]

I assume there is something new in there for the Nike+ stuff. that required a seperate attachment previously.

But doesn't the 1.2 update available for last year's models add the same functionality, thus taking away the required use of the module?

I don't think either the nano or touch changed at this year, physically. Just a software and price point update.

 

[justinfreid]

Look closely at iFixit

If the answer to both of your questions was 'no', why would there even be a new generation?

I think the change primarily turns on the firmware which, as of the newly released 1.2, brings the previous Nanos into parity with the announced ones. According to iFixit the model number is the same even though the part number is different, this is a minor tweak at most. We're calling the new Nanos a new generation, Apple hasn't done that yet. The only difference may be Nike+ support but...

I assume there is something new in there for the Nike+ stuff. that required a seperate attachment previously.

...I think they've simply updated the Nano's software to use its built in accelerometer (which both generations have) as the pedometer and are calling that feature Nike+. According to the new Nano product page "There’s no need to connect a receiver or use a shoe sensor to track your steps" and iFixit didn't find a Bluetooth chip in the new Nano.

 

[swarmster]

You would think iFixit might have done a comparison, but here are the two boards:

http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPod-Nano-6th-Generation-Teardown/3563/2#s17113
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPod-Nano-7th-Generation-Teardown/6554/2#s28229

Besides slightly different numbers stamped on the chips (could just be serials or date codes, who knows), they look pretty identical. The new one has Sandisk memory instead of Toshiba (or at least, this one did, they could be dual-sourcing). The batteries are the same.

I think the part number bump is just to specify that it comes with the new firmware (and/or I guess the memory supplier change, if that is a change). And as others have mentioned, there has been no "iPod nano 7th generation" added to Apple's compatibility charts.

 

[nagromme]

All the new stuff Apple came out with 2 days ago consists of the following:

The 4S is an all-new phone with a familiar shape. (The media should look beyond the superficial. Same goes for the name—if this were called the iPhone 5 that alone would win it more praise! Silly. But real buyers don’t care—they’ll snap up the all-iPhone 4S!)

And you forgot two big things:

• iOS 5

• iCloud

How often does any company deliver so much—shipping, not vapor--in one event? Those two are the ones I’m excited for!

 

[MarkU]

There is no new iPod nano hardware, just software

According to iFixit the model number is the same even though the part number is different, this is a minor tweak at most.

Sadly, these iFixit people didn't realize that the "part number" (MCxxxLL/A) includes the color. So all they've done is to tear apart a blue 6th generation iPod nano, instead of a red (or whatever) one they did before. The announced refresh is pure software.

...I think they've simply updated the Nano's software to use its built in accelerometer (which both generations have) as the pedometer and are calling that feature Nike+. According to the new Nano product page "There’s no need to connect a receiver or use a shoe sensor to track your steps" and iFixit didn't find a Bluetooth chip in the new Nano.

Exactly, except that they are the same HW generation.

 

[jayducharme]

I don't understand the market for the Nano. For $50 more you can get a Touch which does so much more, plus it's an iPod. Are there people who really need a tiny music player like the Nano? Is it particularly for athletes who want something unobtrusive?

 

[nsbio]

I don't understand the market for the Nano. For $50 more you can get a Touch which does so much more, plus it's an iPod. Are there people who really need a tiny music player like the Nano? Is it particularly for athletes who want something unobtrusive?

For example, I use my Nano for listening to books and music while at work and the Nano is clipped to my shirt pocket. That way, all controls are instantly accessible. Try to do that with iPod touch. Nano can not do all, but it has its place.

 

[Chundles]

688LL/A is Graphite.
689LL/A is Blue.

The part numbers have not changed.

 

[MrXiro]

I don't understand the market for the Nano. For $50 more you can get a Touch which does so much more, plus it's an iPod. Are there people who really need a tiny music player like the Nano? Is it particularly for athletes who want something unobtrusive?

That's pretty much the gist of it... it's a GREAT audio player... though I would have preferred 1 more multi-use button on it somewhere. Sometimes I want to pause the player quickly (like someone decides they need to talk to me at the gym) and turning on the screen to do that takes a few seconds. This is a perfect little music/audio player for those who enjoy being within the Apple ecosystem.

I love wearing mine as a watch too.

 

[MrWillie]

I don't understand the market for the Nano. For $50 more you can get a Touch which does so much more, plus it's an iPod. Are there people who really need a tiny music player like the Nano? Is it particularly for athletes who want something unobtrusive?

For $50 more than the 16 gig Nano you can get a 8 gig touch. With it's small size and light weight IF it gets dropped, it's not damaged. It's also very unobtrusive and includes an excellent FM tuner. Wife has tried several portable radios in her office, the Nano is the only tuner that works. Besides, I already have an iPad and a BB 9810, Nano fits in perfectly.

 

[cualexander]

I'm really disappointed in the lack of bluetooth support. It kind of makes it's usefulness as a watch very limited. I want to be able to have it as a watch and wear my bluetooth headphones with it. The best I could come up with is a small bluetooth adapter that plugs into the end of it that converts the nano to bluetooth, but I want something that is integrated. Bluetooth chips are not that big, I feel they could incorporate one in there somehow.

 

[Gatteau]

I was hoping for a redesign, tbh.

 

[mattlol]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en_US) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

Weren't these supposed to have a useless camera or something?

you believe the garbage you read on this site?

LOL!