More Details on Next iPod Touch and Nano

[Heimlich]

I hate contributing to rumors because it just overhypes everything and ruins the actual release. I won't mention any specs or features.

All I can say is people are really going to like the new 1-sq. inch screen product. The response to this product will be comparable to the iPad's response. Some people will see it and say "Of course!", others will say "Wow it's just a stupid small screen". It might take some time getting used to but people will eventually catch on. It also might not be impressive at first, feature-wise, but there will be new doors opened and the product will have lots of room to grow. Remember what Steve mentioned earlier, it's all about the screen now.
It will be up to case and accessory makers to turn it into something familiar.
Also expecting a more positive response on forums to the new iPod Touch. That's because people love upgrades. People welcome upgrades and are confused by change.

To debunk some rumors:
-the screen will not be just a click-wheel. Apple will not use a screen for a single purpose
-no dual screens on any product ever.

 

[Jamie 360]

To me the square-shaped touch-nano makes sense, I think it's real.

Damn, I haven't bought an iPod since the first iPhone came out, but if the new one is a Mini-me of the iPad, that would be too cute to resist!!!!!!!

 

[ghostface147]

I think Apple may drop the Shuffle.

 

[bluedog3401]

What if



3x3 touchscreen in place and nano stays widescreen. Yes. Maybe..

If this image of a tiny touch screen device that has bluetooth becomes the real product, imagine if THAT ALSO replaced the Apple Remote! If Apple put out a shuffle-sized device that could control ALL your iPods and AppleTV's, iTV, etc. via a bluetooth connection you could use it as a standalone mini player or remote for your other devices.

To me this would make them sell unbelievably well, AND gut the current mini-mp3 player market.

 

[lazyKyosuke]

first glance without reading anything I thought it was 2G iPad. Apple likes to throw curve balls at people so this could really be a shuffle, as previously stated the nano has focused on it's widescreen (even beating iTouch to a camera/video). Or it could just be a new Product from apple, like a keychain ipod or something where you can listen to music, have slideshows, play videos.

It's not really like Apple to drastically change a product so I will stick with my New Product theory

 

[LondonCentral]

New name too;


iThumbPad

 

[doctor-don]

So?

 

[jeznav]

- the target market will be music, games and the video filmers that used the nano to film. to different the ipod touch from the iphone it will NOT have a frontfacing camera and therefore NO facetime. it will also have a weaker camera compared to the iphone (3mp) but be a bit thinner.

http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/08/05/145717-ipodtouch4b_500.jpg

.. to save money, apple might remove the dock connector and the dock. instead the nano will be powered with a tiny cable that is plugged into the audio-connector

 

[mrfoof82]

This makes perfect sense. Take the existing Nano. Ok. Cut off everything below the screen. As in, no click wheel. Done.

This isn't surprising. I gave my parents 16GB 5th generation nanos this year for mother's/father's day. Compared to my iPhone, the click-wheel interface seems clunky. The touch interface is simply faster to move around in.

If the touch screen is 1.7" on each side, that means the diagonal is ~2.4 inches. Making it the biggest nano screen thus far (5th gen is 2.2 inches, 3rd and 4th gen was 2.0 inches).

 

[PsyD4Me]

iPods never need touch capabilities, that's what an iPhone and iPad is for. Stupid Steve

 

[kmiahali]

Going of the picture above, if that is a Nano, then tbh I don't think I like it?

Maybe on release it might look better, but going of that I don't at all

We shall see soon!

I understand what you're saying but I'm taking as an iPhone 4 situation. Kind of like when Gizmodo released the iPhone 4 design and everyone said it was horrible and "Un-apple like" and then next thing you know, that's exactly what Apple releases at the iPhone event. This is kind of similiar, except, you know, without the Gizmodo influence.

 

[Megagator]

5 days, 2 hours, 34 minutes, and 10 seconds!

 

[Kid A]

I thought the whole point of the shuffle was that you didn't have to look at it, which makes it a great player for jogging and other sport activities. If you want the screen, you go with the Nano. When you're out and about you just want to do things quickly, I remember having my iPod Classic 100% full of music, and it was a nightmare finding what i wanted to play, added 10 minutes to my journey. I now use playlists and my Nano, although my girl friend's Shuffle is really quick an easy to use, probably even better for short journeys!

+1
Most sensible thing i've read so far. i don't know why everyone is saying the small square screen is for a shuffle. i suppose, one never knows with Apple; but it seems like adding a screen and even a modest amount of touch features defeats the purpose of the ultra-simple shuffle.

The iPod shuffle evolution so far:
1st gen: USB stick with buttons
2nd gen: even smaller with buttons, USB moved to a dock
3rd gen: tiny buttonless capsule, buttons moved to earbuds
4th gen: BIGGER, tiny Retina Display touch screen, features, features, feautures! -- I don't think so.
(One of these things looks not like the others).

Someone in another thread mentioned the current shuffle is great for skiing/snowsports because there's no screen, etc. to freeze up, etc. And that makes sense for what the shuffle is good at. That doesn't mean necessarilly that the market is big enough for Apple to remain in, just like the market for the iPod classic may not be worthwhile for Apple in the future (even though there will always(?) be some who will want "just a large-storage music player, no apps, no bells and whistles, no wifi"). But as long as it is lucrative for Apple to make shuffles and classics, they probably will.

But that tiny square (i'm thinking more of those tiny square cases pictured yesterday... b/c from just a part, you can't tell if that is the whole size of the device or one component of a larger iPod)... I will buy one and eat one if it turns out to be a shuffle!! If you can scroll through all your titles and have fancy things to look at and other little features, IT AIN'T A SHUFFLE, folks! A shuffle is just for shuffling. period. (or playing a playlist sequentially. parenthetical period.)

But i don't think tiny square iPod (if such a thing exists) will replace the nano either. I think it is some new device. iPod Watch, iWatch, iPod FaceTime. the form factor looks like it is ideal for the wrist.

And people saying it will be a tiny square remote...? Apple just made the Apple remote BIGGER with the aluminum redesign. why would they make a touch version that is teeny-tiny? (maybe iWatch/iTinySquare will have a remote app, but i don't think it will be a dedicated remote device).

Maybe I'm wrong and it IS a replacement for the nano, but the current nano still seems pretty popular from my anecdotal experience. I rarely ever see classics out in the wild. everyone seems to have a tall skinny nano of one gen or another. i probably see as many of those as i do iPhones, and more than i see touches. (again, just anecdotal).

To me, the current nano design IS the new classic. if they can ever get 128 GB of flash memory in those (and i'm not a techy, so if the laws of physics or industrial engineering preclude that, someone please jump in here and swat me down) then the iPod classic is dead. i can see them going with a virtual touch clickwheel (maybe that's what the square screen is for) or not, but i can't see them ditching the now-classic brightly-colored nano just yet. but who really knows.

once again, if there is a tiny square touchscreen iPod coming, it is a brand NEW product... iPod Watch, iWatch, or iFaceTime. just my wild guess. that is all.

 

[gan6660]

My predictions:

iPod Classic and Shuffle are gone.
A 16gb 3rd gen iPod Touch starts at $149.
32gb & 64gb 4th gen Touch with 2 cameras, Retina display, etc. come it at $229 and $299.

The new square Nano starts at $79 for 8/16gb and $99 for 16/32gb.

A new 7" iPad Mini/iPod Touch XL debuts at $349, $449 and $549 for 16/32/64gb.

The new iTV is released with the $99 pricepoint, but there will also be an iTV app for the 2 most current iPhones/Touch that allows you to dock them to your TV for a iTV experience. Will require iOS 4.1 which is also released at this event.

 

[shingi70]

What if



3x3 touchscreen in place and nano stays widescreen. Yes. Maybe..

I like the way you think.

 

[macfreek57]

It's for FaceTime

I bet it's for the nano to have FaceTime without including a second camera. The camera will still be on the back, but there will also be this extra screen on the back. Touch-sensitive so you can take pictures by tapping it (possibly auto-focus too?). And I'm sure apple will find some other clever use for it as well to make it a more exciting and promotable feature.

 

[Kid A]

My predictions:
but there will also be an iTV app for the 2 most current iPhones/Touch that allows you to dock them to your TV for a iTV experience. Will require iOS 4.1 which is also released at this event.

Doubtful. If you are so fortunate as to have an iOS device (so Steve would think), why aren't you using it as a Remote to control your new Apple TV (or iTV... i really hope the rumored name change is wrong), huh??? and if you don't have an iOS device, by Jobs, you need to get one! (Maybe that's why Remote App is getting so stale... it's been in "why bother" mode until the new Apple TV comes out).

If the price point is only $99 for tv/iTV, you need to just buy one. No double dipping with your iDevice. If your iPhone 4 rings, people really wanna get up and walk over to your TV to answer it? No. Getting up to answer the phone is so 20th century. =)

 

[Bodypainter]

My guess is they're giving the nano basic mobile telephony functionality. That would make sense to iPad owners who now have less use for an iPhone. So customers could either go for an iPad + nano combo, or for an iPhone.

why should they? the nano is an entry-ipod, therefore it has to be cheap and easy to use and small.

but what they could do is an iphone nano. unfortunately such device would canibalize the iphone sale, so they won't make it unless there is a need for this.

 

[brn2ski00]

Merging the nano and shuffle is not a bad idea.

I mean, 4 different iPod models is a bit overkill. Having 3 to choose from should suffice for the average consumer.

 

[phillipjfry]

i'm thinking two squares on the new ipod nano
1 square is the display showing the cool retina display
1 square is a touch sensitive pad that you flick and scroll through songs (this shows that they can get rid of the circular click wheel that's been synonymous with ipod)
it will rock socks. That is all.

 

[0098386]

My guess is they're giving the nano basic mobile telephony functionality. That would make sense to iPad owners who now have less use for an iPhone. So customers could either go for an iPad + nano combo, or for an iPhone.

I very much doubt that. What about people, who I'd imagine to be well into the majority, who just want an MP3 player and not be tied to another phone contract?

Merging the nano and shuffle is not a bad idea.

I mean, 4 different iPod models is a bit overkill. Having 3 to choose from should suffice for the average consumer.

Each one perfectly fits into its market though.
Shuffle: gym, exercise, hassle-free.
Nano: Feature rich, good for teens, small capacity.
Classic: Massive HDD for lots of videos+music. The grandfather of the lot.
Touch: Multifunction PDA.

They might merge the Nano and Shuffle lines, but then we're left with something for teens but not for the gym folk. Apple would remove itself from that market, which I can't see them doing. It's going to be an interesting event for sure.

 

[Bodypainter]

There is a problem with that. Many iPod Classic users just want a container to carry all their music around, and nothing else. Now with the exception of DRM'd music, which is on its way out anyway, there is nothing stopping anyone to build a player that can play MP3 and AAC music, grab the playlists from iTunes and copy everything to that player (reading the complete contents of the iTunes library is exactly two lines of code in MacOS X). And that is all that many classic users want.

i agree. it would be a risky move. on the other side: this product is now nearly 10 years old and it is getting really dated. also i can tell you that there are many people who prefer the list-scrolling with a large display on an ipod touch compared to the clickwheel.

My iPod gets turned on when I sit down in the car, starts playing, gets turned off when I arrive. It could easily be replaced by another player if those idiots learned that I want to play AAC, not MP3, and that I want to use iTunes (and I won't buy any Microsoft products because I suffer enough from their products every day).

many people use their iphone for this task, an ipod touch also looks nicely in a car. it is a question of getting used to it. that's why i also think that apple will rename the ipod touch to ipod. so you will think of an ipod as the ipod touch. the clickwheel will go out of the whole product line - and of course people will miss it. but they will also be forced to learn the multitouch display on the nano as well.

I think if the nano has a touch screen that covers the complete surface, with a simulated click wheel or just a touch interface, then they should change the shape. A screen filling the complete current iPod Nano surface would be 23:10 or close. Make it a little bit wider and less high to 16:10 with the same area of the iPod Nano, and it would be significantly better showing videos, photos and album art.

as we already know the nano is going to be squared. and it will look cute if the display is also squared. it is even possible to make round displays, so why not being a bit "out of the ordinary" and use a square display. apple is known for being a bit extravagant, so it fits into the frame.

they will NOT simulate a clickwheel, because this doesn't work on a multitouch display. what you can do is swipe, point and click just like on a normal ipod touch.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

Whatever the outcome will be. I don't care. Some people are going to like it and the others... will keep complaining anyway. Like this is ever going to change. Not.

Way to make your point about complainers by complaining!



Back on topic, I'm pretty hyped about the new iPod touch. As the article stated if it looks more like the top of a MacBook Pro, just smaller! With no glass on the back I'm all in. Anything to make it more rugged.

From what the article says, though, the touch may not have a flash built in. I'm worried that it may be like the video only nano, or that it may not have such a gorgeous camera as the iPhone 4.

but putting a mic on the front may be interesting...

 

[AppleMactablet]

I personally think the nano will be cut, but the shuffle, touch will stay.
The classic will just get a price drop. nothing more.

The interface should work something like this-swipe to the right to go to the next track, swipe to the left and it goes to the previous track. Tap once to play or pause. and volume control will be on the side. Two new features that originally came from the ipod nano/touch will be incorporated into the new shuffle
1. Shake to shuffle
2. An accelerometer
-the accelerometer will be there so that the album art and controls are always facing in the right direction.

The ipod shuffle should come in 5 or more colors at 4gb for 79.99.

 

[MacinDoc]

Doubtful. If you are so fortunate as to have an iOS device (so Steve would think), why aren't you using it as a Remote to control your new Apple TV (or iTV... i really hope the rumored name change is wrong), huh??? and if you don't have an iOS device, by Jobs, you need to get one! (Maybe that's why Remote App is getting so stale... it's been in "why bother" mode until the new Apple TV comes out).

If the price point is only $99 for tv/iTV, you need to just buy one. No double dipping with your iDevice. If your iPhone 4 rings, people really wanna get up and walk over to your TV to answer it? No. Getting up to answer the phone is so 20th century. =)

I don't think it's worth it to Apple to try to get the rights for the iTV name anyway. And I agree, you will need to use an iOS device or Apple Remote along with the new Apple TV to view iTunes video content on your TV; there will be no direct TV docking for iDevices at this time.