Yea so? the iPhone bumper case had cutouts to both sides. Turns out, the iphone 4 didn't have dual screens front and back but...it had problems.
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.
Next-Generation iPod Nano to Maintain Price Range, Ship Later?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yea so? the iPhone bumper case had cutouts to both sides. Turns out, the iphone 4 didn't have dual screens front and back but...it had problems.
Probably, I was kidding around. Although I'm not sure everyone likes the way BT headphones sound.
Since iPod Touch is the only iPod with iOS and since it already resembles iPad quite a lot.. maybe Apple is going to rename the iPod Touch as a 3,5" iPad and then introduce 7" model too. So there would be 3,5" 7" and 9,7" iPads and the 3 iPods would be old Shuffle, new Nano and the old iPod Classic.
Hence the growing viability of my goofy "iPad Nano 3G" theory.
Apple is moving into "cloud computing". For the portable music market a la iPod, at least for some audiophiles, it's not that you want all your music on the device, it's that you want any your music _now_ - whatever the technology to do it. Dump all your lossless music files on your home computer (which, thanks to the iPad, you don't need to haul around any more), and stream them via 3G to your watch-sized music device. Don't need 500GB on your iPod if you have instant access to ALL your media, wherever it's stored.
It's going to be a clean sweep, out with the old in with the new. I don't see Apple selling a nerfed Touch right next to new amazing ones. HD size has been and will continue to be the only thing differentiating models within specific lines.
See my prior post. You don't need larger capacity on the device, you need access _to_ larger capacity _via_ the device.
Analogy: Netflix all but eliminates the need for storing movies on an iPad. It's not that I want all my movies on the device, I want all my movies available (stored elsewhere) via the device.
Well, I'm not opening my new account dedicated to winnings derived from Stevenote predictions yet, but hey--I have seen more far-fetched. And I think most agree the name "iPod Touch" is lacking. It's the new flagship media player--I think they ought to put the crown on it instead of the "iTouch", myself.
I see what you are saying, but as I have argued before, the very fact that "iPod touch" has "iPod" in its name seems like an awkward relic to me. it was either "iPod touch", "iPhone not", or "iPhoneless" (kidding about the last two). i tend to think of the current nano (sans the sorta gimmicky video camera feature) as the epitome of iPod evolution. the iOS devices (touch included) seem like an entirely different breed. i tend to think of my iPod touch as an "iPad nano", and i even suspect had iPads come first, the touch may indeed be called iPad nano. they could re-brand it as that! in fact, even before i heard all the "iSlate" rumors, being slightly geeky for Star Trek TNG, i had already named my touch "***'s iPADD" (and i have since added the "nano" suffix). if they really do make a 7" iPad, that could be "iPad mini" and the touch could be "iPad nano"... but i guess that suggestion is a bit far-fetched. still, i think of the current nano more as an "iPod" than the touch (which is so much more than an iPod). but if Apple were trying to completely change the mindset, so that when one hears "iPod" they think first of iOS, i can see that logic.
personally, i'd think there'd be advantages to keeping "iPods" and "iPhones" and "iPads" somewhat separate, so that psychologically one might feel the need to own something from each family. if a touch is simply an "iPod" (rather than a nano or a shuffle), then honestly, one really doesn't need both an iPhone and an "iPod", whereas an argument could be made that owning an iPhone and a nano/shuffle/or classic is NOT redundant. but perhaps that bit of psychological marketing trickery (which I could be completely wrong about) is not as advantageous as taking the iconic "iPod" name and redefining what it means (i.e. iOS).
I hear the consensus about not needing everything stored on a device, but what about those who favor quality over quantity? Netflix is great. I love to stream movies, especially old ones, where the streaming quality is on par with an upconvert DVD player. Where it doesn't compare is sound. I would rather watch a Blu-ray over streaming anything.
This being said, I feel the same about music. I do not forsee a cloud based music service being able to replace full blown, uncompressed music. Maybe a lot of people would appreciate this, but I cringe when I see everyone running around playing pandora or the like on a cell phone or iPod speaker. This does not compare in quality to what the artist intended. It is great music is reaching wider audiences but at what cost?
This being said, I feel the same about music. I do not forsee a cloud based music service being able to replace full blown, uncompressed music. Maybe a lot of people would appreciate this, but I cringe when I see everyone running around playing pandora or the like on a cell phone or iPod speaker. This does not compare in quality to what the artist intended. It is great music is reaching wider audiences but at what cost?
Regarding to making the Shuffle bigger, it's not the first time Apple go back and revise a product to make it bigger.
Remember the iPod Nano 3rd gen? They returned to the 2nd gen design during 4th gen with a bigger machine because people think it has better ergonomic. (even though I personally think the 3rd gen is a much smaller and better design than the big long thing we are having now)
The current Shuffle is awful.
Remember the iPod Nano 3rd gen? They returned to the 2nd gen design during 4th gen with a bigger machine because people think it has better ergonomic. (even though I personally think the 3rd gen is a much smaller and better design than the big long thing we are having now)
The current Shuffle is awful.
why not? they sold old "nerfed" touches alongside newer faster ones for the past year. they do this everytime a new iPhone comes out. and they even did this for several months with the 2nd-gen shuffle alongside 3rd-gen. that actually seems to be the trend of late with Apple when it comes to small consumer electronics.
(with Macs and MacBooks on the otherhand, no. new ones come out. old ones never existed, as far as the apple store is concerned).
One may argue that if you're listening to music on an iPod Nano or smaller, you're doing it for the access, not the quality. Streaming a normal .MP3 file isn't that big a deal now.
If quality is the issue, it's still not a problem. Netflix may have to downgrade for 3G delivery, but that bandwidth is still way more than what you'll need to stream a lossless music file, and do so fast enough to buffer way in advance (say, downloading the whole album by the time you're done with the first song) to mitigate reliability issues. 1kbps with a 1GB buffer and a smart (nay, Genius) streaming prediction algorithm would keep you barely aware your vast music library isn't on your wrist.
Why does everyone think this being the Nano is so unlikely.
The average consumer is probably buying the $150 Nano. They would rather buy the 8GB iPod touch, but it's $200. Too big of a price gap.
But lets say the new iPod Touch sells for $180, and adds a bazillion cool features. The average consumer is probably going to shell out the extra $30 to get this feature packed, cheaper iPod Touch.
This leaves the Nano, the cheap option, to replace the Shuffle, and not have to be an alternative to the iPod Touch.
The average consumer is probably buying the $150 Nano. They would rather buy the 8GB iPod touch, but it's $200. Too big of a price gap.
But lets say the new iPod Touch sells for $180, and adds a bazillion cool features. The average consumer is probably going to shell out the extra $30 to get this feature packed, cheaper iPod Touch.
This leaves the Nano, the cheap option, to replace the Shuffle, and not have to be an alternative to the iPod Touch.
sorry, yeah i got that you were kidding. i guess i should find my misplaced 2nd gen shuffle and try clipping it to my shirt-cuff for a day. see if an ear-to-wrist cord is feasible. i'm guessing no.
i guess if the iPod²/iWatch/iPod nano-nano doesn't have bluetooth inside, bluetooth could be built into an optional wrist strap somehow...???
What if, to mitigate a longstanding complain, the new AT&T deal is to lump multiple sibling devices under the same data plan? iPhone, iPad, and iPad Pico sharing the same wireless service?
Special case. Planning ahead and pre-loading a narrow selection is always an option alongside streaming.