You're correct.
It was way to big to be flash based.
I believe the first flash based iPod was either the 1G iPod nano or the 1G iPod shuffle.
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.
iPhone nano - don't just dismiss it as a silly idea
- Thread starter dominicrusho
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You're correct.
It was way to big to be flash based.
I believe the first flash based iPod was either the 1G iPod nano or the 1G iPod shuffle.
Are you stupid?!?!..... :Checks post again:
Forget it, I answered my own question, you are stupid.
No internet on an iPhone? That might be the stupidest idea I've ever heard.
There are multiple physical reasons why the iPhone nano wouldn't work, I'm working on a bigger post, should have it up by tonight. Thanks for the laugh while I'm working.
Hmmm...
An Apple Branded Phone? An iPod that can play video? A SQUARE NANO?
They were the stupidest ideas we heard at the time. Anything can happen.
It's just speculation. No one is right - no one is wrong either!
OK please, just for a second, think about an iPhone nano screen and then put the full qwerty keyboard on that screen and imagine trying to text, write emails, or browse on the portion of the screen that is left.... it would be impossible. That one fact is the reason why the iPhone nano will never happen. Plus, how would apps be transferred onto a smaller screen.
Plenty of people manage to text just fine on dumbphones with their number pad only. The iPhone Nano that has been described/predicted does not include email or "all of the internet", so those don't even enter into the equation.Take the 3G, cut an inch (25.4mm) off the height, .2 of an inch (5.08mm) off the width, .08 of an inch (2.032mm) off the depth, make a slightly smaller Home Button, utilize the same screen, don't require a data plan, keep wifi, App store, & iTunes. Slap a $99 price tag on the 8gb version and own the competition.
What you just described is an iPod Touch thats a little cut down on the side and tops.... Now why would Apple sell an 8GB iPod Touch for $99 when they sell an 8GB touch right now for $229???
Please stop with the ridiculous thoughts. This thing isn't happening. What would the iphone be without the internet or email?? Less than an iPod touch. Just think about it, it doesn't make sense. There was an iPhone nano once, it was called ROKR E1.... ya that didn't sell too well. No please, for one last time, put this rumor to death, it will never happen. At least in the proposed form factor.
Based on what reasoning? A less feature-rich device is exactly the point of an iPhone Nano. By your logic, the iPod Nano and Shuffle shouldn't sell, either, because those products are "less than an iPod Touch".
Not everyone in the world wants or needs email or the internet on their phone.
As for price: I wish people would stop saying "$99 is unrealistic" when they clearly don't understand how carrier subsidies work...
Good point. We all know how much he likes the iPhone. And even if the nano wasn't ready for release, they could still announce it. Other rumored and speculated products, like the quad-core iMac, redesigned Mac mini, iLife/iWork '09, etc. aren't as significant as the iPhone nano and can be presented without Jobs.
They sure did! The legendary Thread 500.
I don't need a cell phone.
Come to think of it, a smaller phone bill would basically make a cheaper phone.
I couldn't have said it better. It's hard to make the iPhone's display smaller. A bigger display, in the form of a mini-tablet, is possible with split screen, applications on "windows," or UI objects staying the same and the app resizing to fit the display.
The poster was simply saying that, prior to the iPhone, many people adamantly denied Apple would ever make a phone. I'm sure there were iPhone rumours that got the exact same sort of "it will never happen" replies that the Nano is getting these days.
I'm sure lots of people said the same thing about Apple ever switching to Intel chips, or putting video on the Nano, or any number of other things Apple has done.
Quite honestly, I think the people that are convinced Apple will not do something are deluding themselves. I don't know if Apple will ever produce an iPhone Nano, but I do know that they have a habit of doing things people thought they never would. Saying they'll "never do something" is pretty silly, unless you're Steve Jobs.
And I'm pretty sure even Steve Jobs said they'd "never" do video on the iPod...
Yeah, i read a thread from years ago saying that apple would never make a music player, and they thought it would never sell if they did. How wrong they were.
Are you suggesting that people will text on their iPhone nano with the number pad style typing??? Do you realize how far back that would go? That would be anti-revolutionary and anti-apple thinking when it comes to cell phones.... Thoughts?
That's how I would approach the iPhone Nano. Call it whatever you like, but the iPod Nano still uses the traditional click wheel interface, not a touch screen. I think all of the critisisms levied against a "mini iPhone" with a touch screen are accurate: a smaller screen would be harder to use, and unless they incorporated a slide-away QWERTY keyboard like the HTC Touch Pro uses, it would be silly.
I imagine an iPod Nano with a phone in it, and a slide-away number pad. It just follows logically to me that if the iPhone is basically an iPod with a phone, then the iPhone Nano would be an iPod Nano with a phone.
*shrug*
That said, based on the rumours and the direction Apple is taking, I'm starting to think if an iPhone Nano does appear, it will be touch-based. And while I still think there's a market for a less feature-rich device (i.e. no full browser, no GPS, etc.), there are some problems that Apple would have to address if they developed a smaller touch-screen device.
I'm starting to wonder if they might do an iPod Nano form factor device, with a touch-sensitive numberpad, or maybe something like the BB Pearl's abbreviated keyboard. Any way you cut it, I think the keypad is a big problem for Apple concerning a Nano... making it useable but still forward-thinking is tough.
It's just not gonna happen... Do you really think that Apple would release a product and at that an iPhone, with a keypad?
I think an iPhone Nano is inevitable, yes. It just does not make sense for Apple to ignore such a huge market.
What form an iPhone Nano will take, I'm not sure. But is it coming? I think so.
So what is the real point of the iPhone nano? The $99 price tag or the dumbed down feature set? If you say the $99 price tag, you're wrong because that is up to AT&T not Apple really. If you say the dumbed down feature set, you wrong because they wouldn't dumb down the best phone on the market, it would give Apple a bad name in the cell phone market.
I like how you ask a question and then answer it yourself. Makes my role easy. Sadly, your answers make zero sense. Your question has been answered a million times, but o summarize:
1) Not everyone wants a smartphone. There are plenty of people for whom a simple cellular telephone is all they want or need. That market is not going to go away - there will always be demand for "dumbphones".
2) Not everyone can afford or justify an iPhone. The mandatory data plan is a considerable expense. An iPhone Nano would likely not have a mandatory data plan, and thus the actual cost of ownership is far lower (more than $700 cheaper over a two year contract term). If the Nano were available on Pay as You Go, it would appeal to an even larger group of people.
3) There is no "one size fits all" product. All companies make different products to cater to different markets. Apple makes a Mac Mini, for lower-end consumers, an iMac, for consumers/pro-sumers, and the Mac Pro, for serious professionals. Honda makes the Civic, for budget-minded consumers, the Odessy, for those needing a van, and the S2000, for those who want a sports car. An iPhone Nano would cater to a different market than the regular iPhone.
The price point is a prediction, and it's not "the point" of the phone per se. But whether Apple or AT&T sets the price doesn't matter particularly. Apple makes a profit from each handset sold, and AT&T makes a profit from the sale of the associated voice plans.
As for "dumbing down" the best phone on the market giving Apple a "bad name"... did "dumbing down" the iPod, the best mp3 player on the market, give Apple a bad name when they introduced the Mini? No. The Mini became their best selling iPod. Did introducing the Mac Mini, a "dumbed down" Mac Pro, give them a bad name? Of course not.
Hell, did Honda give themself a "bad name" by introducing the Fit, a "dumbed down" Honda Accord? Of course not. That's how business works: different products for different types of consumers.
If at&t didn't force a data plan on you, and you got one of the refurbs for $99 - would that satisfy your cost concerns?
I own an iPhone, and I love it to death. But I'm aware enough that not everyone wants or needs a smartphone. When I got mine, my dad's first comment was how big it was. He loves his iPod nano, he doesn't need a smartphone, even though he can afford one. I think he would be a prime target for an iPhone Nano.
In Canada, you can get an iPhone without a data plan. Yet consumers like my father don't own one, for other reasons.
Making the iPhone cheaper does not mean it is no longer a smartphone. Compared to many of the dumbphones on the market, it's still big, and it's still complicated. Yes, it's easier to use than a Blackberry, but it's still not as easy as punching a number into a dumbphone and hitting "send".