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

iPod Nano and Touch In Stores Tomorrow, Early Reviews

mntpng said:
iPod nano and iPod touch are very disappointing in my opinion. Apple took away two big features from iPod nano which are video capture and playback. Does anyone really care that you can do multitouch on a tiny square inch screen? Come on.. Really? The new iPod nano has been downgraded to basically an iPod shuffle with a screen.
Click to expand...

Who cares about an SD resolution video camera, or watching videos on a tiny screen? I'd far rather have the device clip onto clothing, yet also allow me to view my music to select what I play, and have a lot of storage. This new nano goes back to the core iPod functions, and that is good.

The reviews are positive about the interface and the device in general.

It would appears as though iPod touch has couple major features added but they are built using inferior parts. The retina display isn't the same quality as the iPhone 4 and the back camera is also very poor without a flash.
Click to expand...

I agree about the camera, although the video it records seems quite reasonable, and that is clearly the major reason for the back camera rather than still shots. As a cheap HD camera it will do the job, it's practically a free addition to the device, better than paying $100 for a standalone device you'll never have with you.

As for the display, it's not that much worse than the iPhone's display, and it's significantly better than most other displays on music players and phones.

I don't see how anyone can get excited about the new iPod touch. Does anyone really care about the gyroscope or the vibrate motor?
Click to expand...

Anyone who will play games on the device will care.

The front facing camera seems like a it's cool thing to have at first but I don't know anyone that actually use face time after the initial novelty wore off. What good is a front facing camera if one else is using face time?
Click to expand...

Video calling is a gimmick. But some people will find it useful I'm sure. And it'll make sexting teens happy.

I have a 2nd gen iPod touch and I most certainly didn't see a need to upgrade to 3rd gen so I was looking forward to the new 4th gen iPod touch and I'm quite disappointed at it's offering. Only saving grace is that the iPod shuffle got it's buttons back so maybe I'll pick one of those up.
Click to expand...

Why replace something that is in perfect working order? However the added features will attract people with older nanos or who don't have an iPhone (or other smartphone).
 
Hattig said:
...

I agree about the camera, although the video it records seems quite reasonable, and that is clearly the major reason for the back camera rather than still shots. As a cheap HD camera it will do the job, it's practically a free addition to the device, better than paying $100 for a standalone device you'll never have with you.

As for the display, it's not that much worse than the iPhone's display, and it's significantly better than most other displays on music players and phones.
Click to expand...
Which simply means that you haven't seen one in action, next to the iPhone 4 because seriously.... it is a pretty obvious difference.
 
A significant percentage of people will probably lose those little ipod nanos. Would they buy another or go for something larger so it doesn't happen again?

Also they are square, so I can see someone using them as individual pixels in some large display.

As for accessories, the nano needs to have a keychain accessory.
 
ten-oak-druid said:
A significant percentage of people will probably lose those little ipod nanos. Would they buy another or go for something larger so it doesn't happen again?

Also they are square, so I can see someone using them as individual pixels in some large display.
Click to expand...

Lets say the display you make is ~500,000 pixels, which is kind of on the low end. That should only cost your about 75 million dollars.
 
My (probably insignificant) opinions:

  • The nano's been nerfed. As said earlier, it's a shuffle with a screen now.
    I can understand why Apple deleted the camera, but removing video playback too? Sure, it would be somewhat hard to watch on the tiny screen and would eat battery life like crazy, but it would have been nice to retain the ability. I use my 5G nano with the Composite TV adapter sometimes on trips, to play back a movie or a few TV episodes. In that sense, it's like a miniature iPod classic.

    It's somewhat disheartening to learn that the nano's OS is not true iOS 4. A shame; Apple could have adapted iOS to the nano's screen size and altered the SDK, allowing developers to make nano-specific apps. Perhaps a FLIQLO analog clock? That would rock.

    Oh well, ya win some, ya lose some. It's not my favorite, but it's not the absolute worst iPod either. That's still the 3G shuffle-- and Apple corrected that mistake, thankfully.

  • I went to my local Apple Store last week to check out the Retina Display on the iPhone 4. What I saw when I brought up the full (non-mobile) version of MacRumors onscreen was quite impressive. With the device in landscape mode, the MR sidebars were actually legible without zooming. On previous iDevice screens, these were maybe two or three pixels tall and unintelligible.

    If the touch's screen is anything like this, then I can see the touch continuing its selling streak. Very nice indeed. My wife is already considering upgrading, and she's had her touch for less than a year.
 
Anecdotally

swingerofbirch said:
It's funny to compare the reviews, and I've only read Engadget and CNET so far.

Engadget says that the iPod touch does not have tap to touch focusing. CNET says it has tap to touch focusing just like the iPhone.

Engadget says the screen is fine but of lower quality than the iPhone. CNET calls the screens "identical."

CNET and Engadget both mention the device has no GPS as a negative, but then CNET goes on to say the editors at CNET believe the iPod touch is "maiming" several markets including GPS receivers! Huh?

CNET is upset that the sleep/wake button moved to the same side as the iPhone; Engadget is happy with it.

And this strange one from CNET: "As far as music and video services beyond iTunes are concerned, the iPod Touch is much more flexible than iPods in the past. Any unprotected MP3, AAC, Apple Lossless, AIFF, or WAV audio file can be transferred to the Touch without hassle, and DRM-protected Audible audiobook files will work, as well."

I can't remember the last iPod those file formats didn't work with (not that I've ever tried a wav file, but . . .)

All in all, I think CNET could use someone a bit more on the ball reviewing their products. But it was very pro-Apple, if a bit wrong in places.
Click to expand...

I was playing gigs where I was playing live with my guitar, a keyboardist and then my 20 gig iphone 4th generation with .AIFF or .WAV files of bass, drums and ancillary keyboards right off the DAW so it could sound like a full band for a last minute gig a few years ago where the actual people involved couldn't be there.

Worked very well I must admit, better than I'd care to admit.

I don't know what cnet is talking about.
 
Ah!

dave1812dave said:
Back in 1996, I had an acoustic neuroma near my left ear. Surgery killed the hearing in that former "audiophile" ear, leaving me with one good ear and making stereo and surround sound a thing of the past for me. In order to listen to both channels of the songs I rip for itunes, it was easy enough for me to choose the mono setting for ripping, but that didn't do me any good for listening to Pandora on my touch, which I do a lot. I resorted to cutting the TINY wiring to my Koss headphones and bridging the leads together. It works, but it also makes the wiring susceptible to breakage which it has done once already. the fiddly soldering requires a very steady hand and strong magnifier lenses to see what I'm doing. what a pain. it will be nice if my next mp3 player has a mono option!!
Click to expand...

David Torn the musician also had the same problem and the same surgery leaving him with hearing in one ear only. I talked with him about it back when he was touring with Polytown (he was playing guitar and keyboards at the time) and it's interesting since he also does production for other artists including his own work and he actually has to do production in stereo for the masses but listens to it himself in mono and "imagines" what the field would sound like in stereo.

There'a actually an adapter at Radio Shack that allows stereo mini-out to dual mono that was a couple of dollars the last time I checked - I use it for a guitar effects box that has a stereo output but actually sounds much better in dual mono mode (a feature I discovered purely by accident).

Your mileage may vary.
 
supergod said:
B

This new "nano" should really be sold for $100 as a new iPod shuffle, with 6 gb storage.
Click to expand...

I'm glad they don't listen to you. Why would you want to reduce the size of the storage?! Shoot, that's one of my complaints about the nano is that they didn't increase the storage capacity. The storage space in the nano is just enough that it should fit most average collections. 6 GB is right in the would be a problem for a lot of people who would want a player that fits most their collection but not reduced size enough to justify the cost for those that just want somethign cheap that they can put a few songs on.

I love that the new nano is small and clippable cause it means I get all the advantages of the shuffle with the reasons I got the nano instead (storage space and screen).

Plus, at that price they would pretty much kill any shuffle prices. Why would you pay 50 dollars for a shuffle when for just 50 more you get more space *and* a screen? The point is not to cannibilize your sales with your other items but have them fit a niche that is different.
 
I thought that this would be the iPod Touch where they finally get rid of the chrome/stainless steel back. It's looked dated for a while now. Not to mention it scratches extremely easily.
 
dXTC said:
My (probably insignificant) opinions:

  • The nano's been nerfed. As said earlier, it's a shuffle with a screen now.
    I can understand why Apple deleted the camera, but removing video playback too? Sure, it would be somewhat hard to watch on the tiny screen and would eat battery life like crazy, but it would have been nice to retain the ability. I use my 5G nano with the Composite TV adapter sometimes on trips, to play back a movie or a few TV episodes. In that sense, it's like a miniature iPod classic.

    It's somewhat disheartening to learn that the nano's OS is not true iOS 4. A shame; Apple could have adapted iOS to the nano's screen size and altered the SDK, allowing developers to make nano-specific apps. Perhaps a FLIQLO analog clock? That would rock.

    Oh well, ya win some, ya lose some. It's not my favorite, but it's not the absolute worst iPod either. That's still the 3G shuffle-- and Apple corrected that mistake, thankfully.

  • I went to my local Apple Store last week to check out the Retina Display on the iPhone 4. What I saw when I brought up the full (non-mobile) version of MacRumors onscreen was quite impressive. With the device in landscape mode, the MR sidebars were actually legible without zooming. On previous iDevice screens, these were maybe two or three pixels tall and unintelligible.

    If the touch's screen is anything like this, then I can see the touch continuing its selling streak. Very nice indeed. My wife is already considering upgrading, and she's had her touch for less than a year.
Click to expand...

I think if video is something you want, but you are not in the market for an ipod touch, then the classic is an option. The screen is similar in size and the storage is greater. I watch video on mine all the time. Its in my hand and the screen is close so its fine.
 
ten-oak-druid said:
I think if video is something you want, but you are not in the market for an ipod touch, then the classic is an option. The screen is similar in size and the storage is greater. I watch video on mine all the time. Its in my hand and the screen is close so its fine.
Click to expand...

If the nano remains in this new form factor for subsequent generations, the classic will probably be my next iPod (provided the classic is still on the market and not transformed into a higher-capacity touch). It would be nice to have a larger set of videos available, as well as a much larger subset of my music library. The only drawback is the lack of color choices; I do like the blue on my nanos, and I'm not keen on colored skins or cases.
 
I still think the previous nano gen was their best to date even without a touchscreen. The bigger screen, the video recording, and man did that thing have sexy curves. Now it's a box...
 
According to Steve Jobs' Keynote, the new iPod touch "Retina Display" is a 24 bit display. The iPod touch display is therefore IPS because 24 bit color is 8 bits to represent red, 8 bits to represent blue and 8 bits to represent green. 2^8 = 256, and 256 levels of each of the three colors can therefore be combined to give a total of 16,777,216 mixed colors (256 × 256 × 256).
 
Look at these displays:
4970631765_f530b3fde5_z.jpg

What a difference (the right one is of course the latest and greatest).

Picture courtesy of ilounge.com
 
Jaasen Jones said:
I still think the previous nano gen was their best to date even without a touchscreen. The bigger screen, the video recording, and man did that thing have sexy curves. Now it's a box...
Click to expand...

Agreed. I love my blue 5G. If it were to get destroyed or rendered unplayable by some mishap, I'd immediately replace it with a refurb 5G nano without having to think twice about it.
 
I think the biggest sticking point for me with the new Nano is the price - the iPod classic remains a much better deal, for the money. Again, it's something I'm just going to have to play with to decide whether or not it's what I really want.
 
Does anyone know if the headphones included with the new ipod touch are the ones with mic and remote?
 
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