Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPhoneNano.com redirects to Apple

O

oticon6

macrumors regular
Original poster
I'm not sure if anyone has noticed this yet, but APPARENTLY www.iphonenano.com used to redirect to a Russian site (according to an AppleInsider forum member). Visiting the link now redirects you to www.apple.com/iphone, which is an interesting development. As far as I can tell, it means one of three things:
- Apple truly is building an iPhone Nano and has registered the domain accordingly
- Apple found and threatened to sue the ripoff makers, which would indicate the end of the Nano clones that have been appearing around the world
- The person who bought the domain beat both Apple and the cloners to it, and Apple bought it off them for the same reason Google buys gooooogle.com

To be honest, I hope for the latter of the three. I don't want to see an iPhone Nano 🙄 The current size is good, but you wouldn't want anything smaller unless you were a child (and children can't get 2 year contracts).

Perhaps we'll see an iPod Touch Nano. That seems more feasible since you don't need the same screen real estate for what you'd be doing 😎
 
apple doesn't own iphonenano.com

so it doesn't mean anything. I could point macrumors.com to apple.com if I wanted to.

arn
 
Code: 
Last login: Sat Dec 27 19:49:59 on ttys000
todds-imac:~ todd$ whois iphonenano.com

Whois Server Version 2.0

Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
for detailed information.

   Domain Name: IPHONENANO.COM
   Registrar: FABULOUS.COM PTY LTD.
   Whois Server: whois.fabulous.com
   Referral URL: http://www.fabulous.com
   Name Server: NS1.FABULOUS.COM
   Name Server: NS2.FABULOUS.COM
   Status: clientDeleteProhibited
   Status: clientTransferProhibited
   Updated Date: 23-dec-2008
   Creation Date: 11-aug-2006
   Expiration Date: 11-aug-2009

>>> Last update of whois database: Mon, 29 Dec 2008 23:52:13 EST <<<

NOTICE: The expiration date displayed in this record is the date the
registrar's sponsorship of the domain name registration in the registry is
currently set to expire. This date does not necessarily reflect the expiration
date of the domain name registrant's agreement with the sponsoring
registrar.  Users may consult the sponsoring registrar's Whois database to
view the registrar's reported date of expiration for this registration.

TERMS OF USE: You are not authorized to access or query our Whois
database through the use of electronic processes that are high-volume and
automated except as reasonably necessary to register domain names or
modify existing registrations; the Data in VeriSign Global Registry
Services' ("VeriSign") Whois database is provided by VeriSign for
information purposes only, and to assist persons in obtaining information
about or related to a domain name registration record. VeriSign does not
guarantee its accuracy. By submitting a Whois query, you agree to abide
by the following terms of use: You agree that you may use this Data only
for lawful purposes and that under no circumstances will you use this Data
to: (1) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission of mass
unsolicited, commercial advertising or solicitations via e-mail, telephone,
or facsimile; or (2) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes
that apply to VeriSign (or its computer systems). The compilation,
repackaging, dissemination or other use of this Data is expressly
prohibited without the prior written consent of VeriSign. You agree not to
use electronic processes that are automated and high-volume to access or
query the Whois database except as reasonably necessary to register
domain names or modify existing registrations. VeriSign reserves the right
to restrict your access to the Whois database in its sole discretion to ensure
operational stability.  VeriSign may restrict or terminate your access to the
Whois database for failure to abide by these terms of use. VeriSign
reserves the right to modify these terms at any time.

The Registry database contains ONLY .COM, .NET, .EDU domains and
Registrars.

Domain iphonenano.com:

  4-66 Prospekt Zhukova
  Moscow,  154260 RU

Administrative contact:
Technical contact:
Billing contact:

  Vlad Simonov
  vlad.simv@googlemail.com
  4-66 Prospekt Zhukova
  Moscow,  154260 RU
  Phone: +916.3267718
  Fax:

Record dates:
  Record created on: 2006-08-11 23:30:57 UTC
  Record modified on: 2008-07-15 13:50:51 UTC
  Record expires on: 2009-08-11 UTC

Nameservers:
  ns1.fabulous.com:
    64.15.205.211
  ns2.fabulous.com:
    64.15.205.212

Note: Automated collection of data from this database is strictly prohibited.

todds-imac:~ todd$

The domain isn't owned by Apple and was registered half a year before the iPhone was even announced. I wouldn't read too much into this
 
oticon6 said:
To be honest, I hope for the latter of the three. I don't want to see an iPhone Nano 🙄 The current size is good, but you wouldn't want anything smaller unless you were a child (and children can't get 2 year contracts).
Click to expand...

I don't understand this line of reasoning. "I don't want the object so I hope the company I like never makes it. Making that object would be dumb."

I will likely never own a pink iPod nano, or a mac mini, or a MacBook Air in its current configuration, but I don't think Apple should stop making them just because I am not the intended target.
 
tobefirst said:
I don't understand this line of reasoning. "I don't want the object so I hope the company I like never makes it. Making that object would be dumb."

I will likely never own a pink iPod nano, or a mac mini, or a MacBook Air in its current configuration, but I don't think Apple should stop making them just because I am not the intended target.
Click to expand...

Thank you for posting this. I was going to say the same thing, but less politely.

If you don't want anything smaller, don't buy it. No one is talking about making the iPhone smaller, they're talking about introducing a new, smaller, more affordable product. How is that a bad thing? 😕
 
Hmm, alright, I definitely should've searched. Sorry arn. Still a bit strange that it would suddenly redirect to Apple though.

As for the "I don't want it, therefore it shouldn't be built" retaliation:
I didn't say "APPLE SHOULDN'T BUILD THIS BECAUSE I HAVE CHUBBY FINGERS" (for the record, I don't). It has nothing to do with ME and what I want. It is to do with my perception of customer decisions and the issues such a product would cause.

If there was an iPhone Nano, it would be cheaper than the big one. Put the two phones beside each other, and quite a lot that would have happily bought the full sized version will choose the smaller one because of the price.

First of all, that means lower customer satisfaction, since people complain of the current keyboard as it is (and I can't give my phone to friends, they struggle and complain about how hard it is to type... imagine that 25% smaller).

Secondly, if it doesn't have the same screen resolution (I'll be amazed if it does), then that'll be very painful for developers.

And lastly, studies have shown that choice is a bad thing. If you give people two options, nobody buys both, but some people buy none because they can't decide which they want.

I apologise for having an opinion 🙂
 
oticon6 said:
Hmm, alright, I definitely should've searched. Sorry arn. Still a bit strange that it would suddenly redirect to Apple though.

As for the "I don't want it, therefore it shouldn't be built" retaliation:
I didn't say "APPLE SHOULDN'T BUILD THIS BECAUSE I HAVE CHUBBY FINGERS" (for the record, I don't). It has nothing to do with ME and what I want. It is to do with my perception of customer decisions and the issues such a product would cause.

If there was an iPhone Nano, it would be cheaper than the big one. Put the two phones beside each other, and quite a lot that would have happily bought the full sized version will choose the smaller one because of the price.

First of all, that means lower customer satisfaction, since people complain of the current keyboard as it is (and I can't give my phone to friends, they struggle and complain about how hard it is to type... imagine that 25% smaller).

Secondly, if it doesn't have the same screen resolution (I'll be amazed if it does), then that'll be very painful for developers.

And lastly, studies have shown that choice is a bad thing. If you give people two options, nobody buys both, but some people buy none because they can't decide which they want.

I apologise for having an opinion 🙂
Click to expand...

believe it or not, apple has people they pay to do market research and decide if and when there is a right time for a new product, based on THEIR OWN market research

not market research quoted by you in a forum, and certainly not your opinion of what people want, based off the tiny percentage of the earths billions of people that you have known in your lifetime

and also, for me at least, iphonenano.com redirects me to a place called iphone nano forums, a place in which there are 2 forums and 0 threads
 
Tallest Skil said:
I was hoping someone would catch my joke about the iGuana, seeing as it's a reptile, but I guess it was too obscure... 😱
Click to expand...

Look dude. You're being funny and all, but obviously the iPhone nano has been fully proven as real and coming soon.

This is exactly like the nay-sayers who doubted a more powerful G5 laptop was coming, or a smaller flash based MP3 player from Apple was in the works. 😉

EXACTLY like that. 🙄
 
tobefirst said:
I don't understand this line of reasoning. "I don't want the object so I hope the company I like never makes it. Making that object would be dumb."

I will likely never own a pink iPod nano, or a mac mini, or a MacBook Air in its current configuration, but I don't think Apple should stop making them just because I am not the intended target.
Click to expand...

why do people on these forums jump and flame people for having an opinion?

Demosthenes X said:
Thank you for posting this. I was going to say the same thing, but less politely.
Click to expand...
case in point.

you people need to lighten up thats probably the one thing that bugs me about forums is constant bashing of people because they said what they thought about the possible upcoming apple product.

and dont bother telling me to leavecause i use this forum alot and im not going to leave.


now to the op, i also would not get an iPhone Nano to small for me and i agree a smaller keyboard would be worse unless apple allowed everything in typeable in landscape mode.
 
dccorona said:
believe it or not, apple has people they pay to do market research and decide if and when there is a right time for a new product, based on THEIR OWN market research

not market research quoted by you in a forum, and certainly not your opinion of what people want, based off the tiny percentage of the earths billions of people that you have known in your lifetime

and also, for me at least, iphonenano.com redirects me to a place called iphone nano forums, a place in which there are 2 forums and 0 threads
Click to expand...

Apple had marketing people 10 years ago too. Look how that turned out 🙂
 
cellocello said:
Look dude. You're being funny and all, but obviously the iPhone nano has been fully proven as real and coming soon.

This is exactly like the nay-sayers who doubted a more powerful G5 laptop was coming, or a smaller flash based MP3 player from Apple was in the works. 😉

EXACTLY like that. 🙄
Click to expand...

Wait... I thought you were on my side, but one of those happened and the other one didn't...

Straight up, now. Are you for the iPhone nano or against it? I'm pretty sure you're against. 😀
 
Big companies sometimes have agencies or agents buy domains and register trademarks for them so that competitors and rumor sites can't follow their advanced market planning.

.
 
Why do we get such noobish stuff like these so much?

1) Companies will buy up tons of domain names that are similar to them just to keep faux sites from popping up and just in case they have future ideas. I wouldn't be shocked if Nintendo owned the wiihd.com domain, Sony owned playstation4.com, and Microsoft owned xbox720.com. None of those is even close to being reality (or even an actual product), but someone probably brainstormed and thought it would be good to buy them. It costs maybe $10/year to hold on to a domain versus the thousands it would cost to buy it back from someone else.

2) A domain redirecting to a site means almost nothing. That just means whomever owns that domain set it to redirect to another site. I could buy iphone4g.com and redirect it to apple.com/iphone if I wanted to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back