Next-Generation iPod nano to be Taller?

[yayitsezekiel]

you know what would be cool. a limited touch nano.
basically thin version of ipod touch with the wheel behind the screen. so you don't need room for the wheel, its behind the screen. the only thing the touch screen would do is everything the wheel has.

that would be cool. But if the touch wheel was behind the screen, would that mean all of the controls would be on the back? or..maybe perhaps they could simply have the same controls that the current ipod touch has and just make the whole thing smaller (just my idea)

However, it appears that slowly apple is integrating all of its devices with the new multi touch UI and I wouldn't be surprised to eventually see all of the ipod models have a multi touch UI. What do you guys think?

 

[Lesser Evets]

Nah, a lot sooner than 2065.

Just 10 years ago a 1MB flash drive was unheard of, if I remember right. When they began marketing them a year later they were expensive. Now a 1 MB isn't even manufactured, it is so small, and that is 9 years later. 1 GB is a relatively small, new, flash drive these days.

We hit some engineering limitations recently, but they'll probably figure out how to go beyond that sometime in the next 5 years.

 

[superhuman]

I hope not..there are situations when a touch screen is just not working right. Sometimes you just can't look on the screen and change the tracks or don't have two hands free. When I am biking I love to handle my Nano just with one hand with almost not looking on the screen. And when I am running, then I also have to concentrate on the road and I don't really want to use all my two hands and my eyes to change a song.

A friend with an iPhone told me, "you can switch tracks with the button on your headset". Well I am using Sennheiser headphones and not the Apple ones and sometimes I don't just want to "change to the next track".
(a workaround would be to make a playlist prior running, but mostly I am deciding on my way, so it's not the best resolution.)

For me it's sometimes handy to actually have a click wheel.

And coverflow..it' tacky and nice, but how useful is it really? Maybe I am old fashioned, but when I am looking for the tracks/artists, I go for an alphabetical list and not flicking through any covers. And If I want some random music, then I just let the shuffle mode do its job. I am not seeing me in any situation using coverflow.



That's also my question..I didn't see them abandon the "long" desing in favor for the "fatty" one until it happened. The Nano G2 fits perfectly into some smaller pockets where the Nano G3 couldn't even think off.
I am open for a practical design change, though it would remind us off a Zune (which I've never seen one in the wild here)

Agree 100%. I want a click wheel for my Nano. If I want a touch screen... I'll buy an iPod Touch! I also use the alphabetical listing versus coverflow. It's much more efficient.

 

[teme]

it certainly is. Apple didn't put a hard disk in the iPod touch for a reason. It'd be waaaaaaay too slow. There is no way that they could keep the OS X iPhone on a hard drive based touch iPod.

Well, maybe Apple can add 1-2 GB of flash to store operating system, album covers and other information that needs to be available fast. Music, videos etc. could be stored on the large hard drive.

 

[pinktank]

I think they should necessarily be as tall but think of the new ones, flip the screen and make the screen a little wider, so videos can be watched horizontally while still having reasonably long song/artist lists

 

[TuffLuffJimmy]

Well, maybe Apple can add 1-2 GB of flash to store operating system, album covers and other information that needs to be available fast. Music, videos etc. could be stored on the large hard drive.

Steve, " and this is the iBrick. It's a iPod classic duct taped to an iPod touch!"

Why don't you just wait until flash storage catches up to HD, it'd be a waste to introduce something like that since we would be back to flash with an equal amount of storage in just a few years.

 

[.Chris]

Agree 100%. I want a click wheel for my Nano. If I want a touch screen... I'll buy an iPod Touch! I also use the alphabetical listing versus coverflow. It's much more efficient.

calm down there. no need to get so worked up....

 

[superhuman]

calm down there. no need to get so worked up....

I don't see how my post could have in any way be interpreted as me being "worked up". Because I used an exclamation point? I'm so sorry.

It wouldn't make sense for Apple to have an iPod Nano with a touchscreen and an iPod Touch with the same capacity... and I simply don't want a touch screen or cover flow.

Not sure where this big push to make all the product lines exactly the same is coming from, anyway... all iPod models don't have to have touchscreens. If Apple was smart, they'd provide a product for each niche... and I think that's what they'll do.

 

[TuffLuffJimmy]

I don't see how my post could have in any way be interpreted as me being "worked up". Because I used an exclamation point? I'm so sorry.

It wouldn't make sense for Apple to have an iPod Nano with a touchscreen and an iPod Touch with the same capacity... and I simply don't want a touch screen or cover flow.

Not sure where this big push to make all the product lines exactly the same is coming from, anyway... all iPod models don't have to have touchscreens. If Apple was smart, they'd provide a product for each niche... and I think that's what they'll do.

Alright, I agree I wouldn't want a touch screen on a nano (then again I hate the new nanos anyway, they're too big) But saying you don't want coverflow on the nano isn't even an argument. If you don't want coverflow don't turn it sideways... besides coverflow is already on the iPod nano.

 

[.Chris]

I don't see how my post could have in any way be interpreted as me being "worked up". Because I used an exclamation point? I'm so sorry.

It wouldn't make sense for Apple to have an iPod Nano with a touchscreen and an iPod Touch with the same capacity... and I simply don't want a touch screen or cover flow.

Not sure where this big push to make all the product lines exactly the same is coming from, anyway... all iPod models don't have to have touchscreens. If Apple was smart, they'd provide a product for each niche... and I think that's what they'll do.

The way I see it, the touch may become the new nano, and the classic may get a touch screen. makes commen sense

Alright, I agree I wouldn't want a touch screen on a nano (then again I hate the new nanos anyway, they're too big) But saying you don't want coverflow on the nano isn't even an argument. If you don't want coverflow don't turn it sideways... besides coverflow is already on the iPod nano.

the 1st gen and 2ed gen nanos were to big, the new nanos arnt that much wider, and are a lot shorter as well as thinner.

Yeah, coverflow has been on the ipods since september. Much needed update. What they should do this time around is get the front row UI on to the ipod, and have everything snyc together with one simple UI.

 

[5855997]

Alright, I agree I wouldn't want a touch screen on a nano (then again I hate the new nanos anyway, they're too big) But saying you don't want coverflow on the nano isn't even an argument. If you don't want coverflow don't turn it sideways... besides coverflow is already on the iPod nano.

He (superhuman) was referring to my post (with more arguments than just the Coverflow, I was mainly talking about how useful a click wheel is during sports). We just said that it's not as efficient as alphabetical lists. It's useless for me and as it seems also for superhuman. You can use it as much as you like.

I won't use it (guess what, I own the G2 and I am really happy with that. I wouldn't consider a G3 if mine fails.) I think Coverflow is too slow when you have many covers.


Keep up the discussions and photoshops. But please don't attack other people with other opinions just because they don't use it the same way you do.

 

[TomsMacBook]

Okay, to all of you lot who are jostling for an 'iPod Nano TOUCH LOLOL' need to consider one thing:

The screen would be far too small to implement a touch-screen. People would mis-touch a hell of alot for it to be useful. It'd be more annoying than anything else. And isn't the nano supposed to be a smaller, lower cost iPod? Touch screen = Higher cost = Apple fanboys complaining.

I personally think that Apple will keep the screen + clickwheel operation. It works well.

 

[SactoGuy18]

Okay, to all of you lot who are jostling for an 'iPod Nano TOUCH LOLOL' need to consider one thing:

The screen would be far too small to implement a touch-screen. People would mis-touch a hell of alot for it to be useful. It'd be more annoying than anything else. And isn't the nano supposed to be a smaller, lower cost iPod? Touch screen = Higher cost = Apple fanboys complaining.

I personally think that Apple will keep the screen + clickwheel operation. It works well.

I agree 100%. The click wheel interface has always worked quite well (mostly because the physical interface is simple to start with!) and the KISS (keep it simple, stupid) philosophy should continue for the lower-end iPod models in this case.

 

[teme]

Steve, " and this is the iBrick. It's a iPod classic duct taped to an iPod touch!"

Why don't you just wait until flash storage catches up to HD, it'd be a waste to introduce something like that since we would be back to flash with an equal amount of storage in just a few years.

iPod Classic isn't that thick, in my opinion. I think it's very compact size for a music/media player. I don't understand the fascination to overly thin products - surely iPod Touch is nice to look at, but would it be totally ugly or crappy to use if it was thicker? I don't think so. If flash sizes will be up to 250GB in just few years, well... that's few years time to sell some other product before that.

 

[iParis]

iPod Classic isn't that thick, in my opinion. I think it's very compact size for a music/media player. I don't understand the fascination to overly thin products - surely iPod Touch is nice to look at, but would it be totally ugly or crappy to use if it was thicker? I don't think so. If flash sizes will be up to 250GB in just few years, well... that's few years time to sell some other product before that.

You're absolutely right.
The Classic isn't thick at all.
Well, the 160GB version is but you couldn't expect that to be thin.

And I wouldn't mind it if the Touch was a little thicker.
In fact, it's too thin for me!
I mean compared to how long it is, it is way our of proportion.

As for the nano, I believe that if it is taller, it will end of turning into either something like the iPod Nano Touch or the iPhone Nano like we've all be talking about.

Steve, " and this is the iBrick. It's a iPod classic duct taped to an iPod touch!"

Why don't you just wait until flash storage catches up to HD, it'd be a waste to introduce something like that since we would be back to flash with an equal amount of storage in just a few years.

ROFL!
That's so funny that a week later my Roflcopter is still exploding.