Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Scandalous Ion Cannon · Sep 8, 2005, 03:48 PM

It doesn't have the ports for the headphones to send power so many devices will need battery add ons.

monkeybrain · Sep 8, 2005, 04:00 PM

I'm really not sure why everyone is so excited by this. It seems to basically be about just making the sexiest iPod yet, but loosing functionality. The pros of the nano are that it is small and has a colour screen. But the cons far outweigh these pros. I bought my 4GB mini for £130, and it has an 18 hour battery life. By comparison the nano is £140, has a 2GB capacity and a battery life of 14 hours.

I'd like to know why people think the nano is so much better than the mini - is making it that small and giving it a colour screen really that important?

I think they just should have put a screen on the shuffle, I'd have bought a shuffle if it had a screen and know people who choose a different player because it lacked a screen.

gkorsgard · Sep 8, 2005, 04:07 PM

I picked up my nano at my Apple store today. It is tiny! I can't wait to get home and charge it and upload music. It is a tiny ipod. You don't realize it until you actually see one.

Scandalous Ion Cannon · Sep 8, 2005, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by monkeybrain

I'm really not sure why everyone is so excited by this. It seems to basically be about just making the sexiest iPod yet, but loosing functionality. The pros of the nano are that it is small and has a colour screen. But the cons far outweigh these pros. I bought my 4GB mini for £130, and it has an 18 hour battery life. By comparison the nano is £140, has a 2GB capacity and a battery life of 14 hours.

I'd like to know why people think the nano is so much better than the mini - is making it that small and giving it a colour screen really that important?

I think they just should have put a screen on the shuffle, I'd have bought a shuffle if it had a screen and know people who choose a different player because it lacked a screen.

For YOU it may not be as good but for me the pros outway the cons.

For example the 3G iPod I bought came with things like the case and the remote which I never used but had to pay for as they were in the box.

I own a shuffle as I like the very small size. The Mini was still too large and heavy for me, this Nano seems like a shuffle with a colour screen which is perfect for me.

zl9600 · Sep 8, 2005, 04:21 PM

um, doesn't the nano offer a 4 gig for that price, gkorsgard? or did apple cut down the features to piss off the british?

Jerome · Sep 8, 2005, 04:34 PM

Headphones are white.

legacyb4 · Sep 8, 2005, 04:53 PM

Just sold my 1G shuffle and put in an order for a new 4GB nano.

Looking forward to the change!

Scandalous Ion Cannon · Sep 8, 2005, 05:04 PM

Originally Posted by Jerome

Headphones are white.

The white headphones are as much a signature as is the scroll wheel.

zl9600 · Sep 8, 2005, 05:23 PM

so are the painful earbuds. okay, i guess that's subjective. i have loved the sony fontopia on my ipod for two years now, they are black, and i could care less as long as they don't fall out or hurt my ears like the apple stock ones do.

Big Mac · 05:55 PM

Originally Posted by monkeybrain

I'm really not sure why everyone is so excited by this. It seems to basically be about just making the sexiest iPod yet, but loosing functionality. The pros of the nano are that it is small and has a colour screen. But the cons far outweigh these pros. I bought my 4GB mini for £130, and it has an 18 hour battery life. By comparison the nano is £140, has a 2GB capacity and a battery life of 14 hours.

I'd like to know why people think the nano is so much better than the mini - is making it that small and giving it a colour screen really that important?

I think they just should have put a screen on the shuffle, I'd have bought a shuffle if it had a screen and know people who choose a different player because it lacked a screen.

You make some great points. The battery life and capacity of the mini was superior to the nano. (We also don't know about the longevity of the nano given the finite flash rewrite issue.) The nano sacrifices four hours and 2GBs in exchange for its diminutive size and color screen. Many, including myself, are attracted to color. While the mini's value is superior in many respects, the nano will be very successful. You said you would have preferred to see a screen on the shuffle - since Apple claims the nano is the size of the shuffle, you got just what you're requesting. I'm trying to decide whether to pick up another mini or go for a nano. If I can find a good close out price on the former I'll likely go that route.

dfbennett · 04:29 PM

Originally Posted by inkhead

I don't mean to be rude, but if you don't have USB 2 on your computer you can buy a $10 USB 2.0 card from any electronics store (Belkin brand or just about any generic).

If you have a laptop that can't be upgraded then I think you shouldn't be using $250 towards an iPod rather you should spend $250 towards a computer that's less than 5 years old ;-)

Uh my computer is just over 2 years old and doesn't have USB 2.0
17" iMac G4 1ghz superdrive.

Anyhow, I don't get why everyone is so excited. Sure the form factor is cool, but now you get less capacity for the same money you'd pay for a mini. 199 used to get you a 4gb mini and 249 was a 6gb unit. Now you get 2 and 4gb respectively. Between that and the lack of firewire synching, I'm thinking if/when I get something to go with my shuffle, it'll be a full sized ipod or a leftover mini.

QuadG5Man · Sep 8, 2005, 06:17 PM

The black colored iPod Nano should come with black headphones.

Kenneth · Sep 8, 2005, 06:36 PM

I just got mine at the Apple retail store. The first shipment only came in black, so I bought myself the black 4GB iPod nano. It is sweet.

gkorsgard · Sep 8, 2005, 06:44 PM

Originally Posted by Kenneth

I just got mine at the Apple retail store. The first shipment only came in black, so I bought myself the black 4GB iPod nano. It is sweet.

They are great aren't they!

Kenneth · Sep 8, 2005, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by gkorsgard

They are great aren't they!

Yes. I'm extremely happy with the iPod nano. As a 10GB iPod (touch-wheel) owner since 2002, I love what I see now.

Miniryu · Sep 8, 2005, 07:30 PM

Originally Posted by monkeybrain

I'm really not sure why everyone is so excited by this. It seems to basically be about just making the sexiest iPod yet, but loosing functionality. The pros of the nano are that it is small and has a colour screen. But the cons far outweigh these pros. I bought my 4GB mini for £130, and it has an 18 hour battery life. By comparison the nano is £140, has a 2GB capacity and a battery life of 14 hours.

I'd like to know why people think the nano is so much better than the mini - is making it that small and giving it a colour screen really that important?

I think they just should have put a screen on the shuffle, I'd have bought a shuffle if it had a screen and know people who choose a different player because it lacked a screen.

The one reason why the Nano is truely better than the mini is the only reason I am going to buy it as opposed to a used mini: flash based disk. I can't go running with my 20 gig click wheel iPod without it skipping, and I'm sure a mini would do the same. Running is my life (well, a big part of it) and the nano fits the bill perfectly.

Eriamjh · Sep 8, 2005, 07:40 PM

Originally Posted by JMII

Not according to Playlist: http://playlistmag.com/features/2005...irst/index.php
Also, it doesn’t work with Apple’s iPod Camera Connector or Belkin’s Media Reader, which means you can’t upload pictures to it.

I think playlist is wrong. Did they test it? Apple says you can put photos on it. Are they stupid enough to not have it support the camera adapter?

macfly · Sep 8, 2005, 08:05 PM

http://www.thinksecret.com/archives/nano/source/12.html

jnrjr79 · Sep 9, 2005, 12:18 AM

What I'm still looking ot know is whether you can use the automatic 128 AAC conversion that you use with the iPod shuffle. I have quite a bit of stuff encoded at a high bitrate and it'd really be helpful to have such a feature.

mathew_m · Sep 9, 2005, 03:37 AM

I think the Nano is great except for 2 things: No firewire, not a big deal for people with newer Macs but I use my Powerbook which does not have USB 2 as my iTunes server. The lanyard which should of been included. Walt Mossberg thinks it's the coolest accessory. Yeah for Apple to profit from. Who wants to re-purchase the same earbuds encased in a 25 cent lanyard? I like the lanyard idea otherwise but shame on Apple for turning it into a $40 add-on. With that said the Nano tubes are a smart item for Apple to profit on. Too bad they don't just sell a clear one for $5 for those who will be buying the black model.

I'm ready to buy but the lack of firewire even in a dock accessory is a current deal breaker.

badtz · Sep 9, 2005, 03:58 AM

Originally Posted by chabig

Making iPods compatible with accessories isn't Apple's job. The accessory makers will accomodate the new iPod. Did you think they wouldn't?

Of course they will TRY to, but , since the pins aren't there, I would think this means they can't draw power from the iPod nano .... true?

ideasculptor · Sep 9, 2005, 04:48 AM

The reason I'm disappointed about the headphone jack is that I use my ipod on my motorcycle. I need the remote control, both because my ipod stays out of sight and out of harm's way in a bag on my tank. Even with a Nano that is so small that i can mount it on top of the bag, I won't be able to control the volume with my gloves on, and volume control is crucial. I hope the dock connector is capable of accepting a remote control in some way, although I'll then have 2 cables coming out of the bottom of the Nano. No one has used the dock connector that way in previuos ipod accessories, but they didn't have to, since they had the remote control port.

And am I the ONLY person out there who wants the ability to skip to the next album when in shuffle albums mode? Would it be so hard to repurpose holding down the next and previous buttons, which I absolutely never do. I like to listen to entire albums, but when riding, I want to select albums at random. If a crappy one comes up, I don't want to have to skip past the next 10 songs manually, eating up battery and distracting me from the road around me. A one second button push that gives me the next album would be SO nice.

Oh, and why can't I autofill to ALL of my ipods? I assume autofill won't work on the nano, either. What a shame. I've got a 120GB library, and I'd like to take random slices of it without going through the effort I have to go through to do so today.

--sam

angelmb · Sep 9, 2005, 06:39 AM

Why sync over USB2 when we could do it over… USB1.1?

Big Mac · Sep 9, 2005, 07:24 AM

Originally Posted by angelmb

Why sync over USB2 when we could do it over… USB1.1?

mediasamurai · Sep 9, 2005, 07:55 AM

I bought my 3G iPod when it first came out, and sadly, only recently it has died. I travel around Asia and often shoot around 1-2GB of photos using my digital camera. I used my 3G iPod to hold them using my Belkin memory card reader, since I didn't want to carry around those tiny memory sticks. I know it's not exactly huge, the 4GB iPod nano, but will it work with Belkin's memory stick reader? I've seen a report that it does not function with Apple's direct link device for connecting a digital camera to the iPod. This 4GB nano thing would be ideal for my travels with it's small size, but I'd like photo storage. Does anyone know of a good solution? I may just buy a 20GB iPod Photo and be done with it, but I like the idea of using flash memory storage as my travels involve a lot of physical activity, and I never really used more than 3GB of storage for my photos anyway.

Eriamjh · Sep 9, 2005, 08:32 AM

iPod nano dissected.

Scroll down for the pics.

Damn, those Japanese are fast!

Eriamjh · Sep 9, 2005, 08:38 AM

Originally Posted by angelmb

Why sync over USB2 when we could do it over… USB1.1?

That's 12... MILLION... bits per SECOND. Muahhaaaahahahaahaa!

mdc · Sep 9, 2005, 08:55 AM

Originally Posted by angelmb

Why sync over USB2 when we could do it over… USB1.1?

img > http://img390.imageshack.us/img390/1...vil16kb7we.jpg

that's funny.

mrgaskell · Sep 9, 2005, 11:27 AM

Can you use like a Flash Drive, albeit with a cable, ala the Shuffle? I use my Shuffle to have access to docs on demand no matter what classroom I'm in. I just don't want to have to have iTunes on every computer in the school.

Thanks!

Scandalous Ion Cannon · Sep 9, 2005, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by mrgaskell

Can you use like a Flash Drive, albeit with a cable, ala the Shuffle? I use my Shuffle to have access to docs on demand no matter what classroom I'm in. I just don't want to have to have iTunes on every computer in the school.

Thanks!

Yes.

Anyone know if you have the option to format it Mac or PC or is it stuck on PC like the shuffle.

neilw · Sep 9, 2005, 11:54 AM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

We also don't know about the longevity of the nano given the finite flash rewrite issue.

People need to Not Worry about this. The Samsung flash is rated at 100K write cycles. If you sync twice per day, that translates to nearly 150 years. Just not an issue for a device like this.

As a computer's primary storage device, it's another story.

Goldfinger · Sep 9, 2005, 04:02 PM

Originally Posted by ideasculptor

Oh, and why can't I autofill to ALL of my ipods? I assume autofill won't work on the nano, either. What a shame. I've got a 120GB library, and I'd like to take random slices of it without going through the effort I have to go through to do so today.

--sam

I'd love that as well, my library is too big as well. I use smart playlists to fill up my iPod mini. But that mini died yesterday, so now I'll HAVE to buy a nano

But on Apple's website they say this: "And if you have more in your iTunes library than will fit on your iPod nano, not to worry. iTunes will create a playlist that fits your style — and your iPod nano’s capacity."

That could be auto fill but i'm not sure since they never mention "Auto Fill".

glideslope · Sep 9, 2005, 05:10 PM

All I have to say is I wanted one the second I picked it up today in my Apple Store. I am not a person who is prone to impulsivity.

This bodes very well for nano.

OtisWild · Sep 9, 2005, 06:49 PM

No problem for me, I did a handbuild XP box after the last G5 refresh/fiasco, and now I have like 8 USB2 ports as well as 2 Firewire 400 and 1 Firewire 800.

I also get 34fps in Ironforge @ 16x12x32 on my 7800GTX, a card that no PowerPC-based Mac will ever have.

And my Mac mini (for OpenTTD, Mail, Camino, iChat, etc.) IIRC has USB2.

So, I suppose this is Apple's subtle ploy at forcing folks to upgrade before Mactels come out?

legacyb4 · Sep 9, 2005, 06:50 PM

Agreed! My buddy in Tokyo who has been holding out for ages finally got a 20G iPod Photo a few weeks back and without even blinking, just ordered an iPod nano for his GF because he's so sold on the iPod lifestyle...

Originally Posted by glideslope

This bodes very well for nano.

teney7 · Sep 9, 2005, 06:59 PM

Does anyone else think the price of shuffle should be cut $10-20 now?.. $99 seems a little much for a screenless iPod now that all other iPods have color screens..
Apple Expo Paris...?

reybart · Sep 9, 2005, 08:26 PM

Nano rocks, nao rocks! My black nano is already shipped and the estimated delivery is 14th of September but I know it will be on Monday(12th) because it will arrive here the USA Friday evening! Fedex never fails me!!

ciparis · 09:56 PM

Originally Posted by ideasculptor

Oh, and why can't I autofill to ALL of my ipods? I assume autofill won't work on the nano, either. What a shame.

--sam

(edited) I agree that it should be an across-the-board feature. Just got home with two 4G black units (wife gets one too), and it's a very nice ipod. It also fills (transfers) markedly faster than our 4G and 6G minis. Looks like our not-very-old minis will be sent off to relatives

EDIT: I was thinking it was the nano that autofills. Just checked -- it does not. The phone does, according to the help menu. Darn. Come on, Apple

redhot_nyc · Sep 9, 2005, 09:25 PM

How long will it take to sync with USB 1.1??

natural1 · Sep 9, 2005, 11:39 PM

Since I don't use the photo features and don't really *need* the color screen, I just placed an order for a 6GB Mini. The mini is small enough and the belt clip is great - I don't like the nano's lack of a belt clip.

mrmister · Sep 10, 2005, 02:44 AM

Definitely can't sync via firewire:

http://gallery.ilounge.com/ipod/albu...ano/nano20.jpg

His Dudeness · Sep 10, 2005, 06:31 AM

Originally Posted by macfly

http://www.thinksecret.com/archives/nano/source/12.html

No big deal, really. How fast do you need to transfer 2 gigs worth of music anyway?

monkeybrain · Sep 10, 2005, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by redhot_nyc

How long will it take to sync with USB 1.1??

It's really not that long, I sync my mini via USB 1 and it takes a few minutes for sure but it's bearable.

Scandalous Ion Cannon · Sep 10, 2005, 02:50 PM

Mt shuffle takes over 30 min to fill 1 gig over USB 1.0

bernardb · Sep 10, 2005, 06:43 PM

I ordered a Black nano the minute it was on the Apple Store web site. I just got a blue iPod mini a few months ago but when I saw shiny black and a color screen i went gaa-gaa...

Sold my mini to a co-worker at a great price.

hakstooy · Sep 10, 2005, 09:44 PM

It seems a lot of people are pissed about the Firewire aspect, but honestly guys, who didn't see that coming after the Shuffle and the dropping of the FireWire cable from the full grown iPod?

Yeah a lot of people are paying the penalty of Apple's stubborn refusal to include USB 2 because of their interest in Firewire, but sometimes, that's the way the cookie crumbles. I know it sucks, I had to sell my favorite computer of all time (my TiBook) because when I got the Shuffle I got sick of remembering to load it with my gym mix 30 minutes before I left.

The nano is a brilliant move that will generate press and keep Apple on the forefront of the digital market, at this point they have to maintain their position as the innovator of the field, they have to be the target everyone chases. The nano, with it's full feature set (relatively, I know) and ridiculously small size changes the whole paradigm. Apple keeps its momentum and control.

I think a lot of people were spoiled by Apple's "consumer friendly" attitude the last 7-8 years, where they didn't leave anyone behind by continuing their support for either proprietary or niche technology. I think this was more out of necessity, as they had to protect every customer they had, than pure benevolence. Now, however, they are the market juggernaut, the "Microsoft of digital music" and they are going to be driving this market forward regardless of its effects on hardcore customers. They are in this to make money after all, I mean, I consider them to care more about the products they produce than just about any major company out there, but c'mon ya'll.

inkhead · Sep 10, 2005, 09:56 PM

It shouldn't be very hard to find a pair of black ones ;-)

Originally Posted by Jerome

Headphones are white.

wilsonng · Sep 10, 2005, 10:28 PM

i guess USB 2.0 is a mainstay for the consumer market (shuffle and nano) while Firewire is reserved for those with more demanding needs (full-sized iPods). So leaving FireWire from the nano and shuffle was an economical (and unpopular) choice.

Macpilot · Sep 11, 2005, 03:37 AM

Just got mine and it is the most awesome Apple product yet.

himself · Sep 11, 2005, 03:11 PM

Originally Posted by wilsonng

i guess USB 2.0 is a mainstay for the consumer market (shuffle and nano) while Firewire is reserved for those with more demanding needs (full-sized iPods). So leaving FireWire from the nano and shuffle was an economical (and unpopular) choice.

I sometimes wonder how much the emphasis on USB with the newest iPods has to do with Apple cozying up with Intel... I would imagine that just as Apple has used the iPod to drive people to iTunes (and vice-versa), Apple could be able to influence wider adoption of firewire in the market if most people who bought iPods preferred connecting via firewire. Apple usually doesn't pass up such an opportunity to push its own interests over that of another company's when its own products are involved.