Macworld: Apple introduces iPod nano ...

mdawson

3,028 posts since
Aug 31, 2004

23. Sep 7, 2005 3:15 PM

in response to: MW Forums

Re: Apple introduces iPod nano

The iPod nano seems like a neat little player although as an iPod mini replacement capacity is lost4 and 6 GB for the mini vs. 2 and 4 GB for the nano. Personally, I think that Apple should have stuck to the iPod mini moniker as these are replacing the mini line. Also, as someone else here mentioned, the colors should have been kept as that aesthetic made the iPod mini very popular with female buyers.

Just on observation here on campus, most people have some incarnation of the iPod, followed by iPod minis and then iPod shuffles (far more rare in public than in the gyms but still in the minority). Of the iPod minis, the vast majority of the owners, again based on observation, are female students. In fact, as I already own a 512MB iPod shuffle and a 60GB iPod, I was planning on getting a free iPod mini when I purchase my new Mac in the next two weeks (the educational purchase deal) and giving it to a female friend of mine that cannot afford one right now. Hopefully, the September 24th deadline is still in effect as she prefers silver and the new iPod nanos are only black and white.

“Cannot run out of time. There is infinite time. You are finite. Zathras is finite. This is wrong tool.” 2.3GHz Power Mac G5/4GB/500GB HDD/OS X 10.4.11/30-inch ACD, 60GB iPod (Color)

chewygoat

213 posts since
Sep 2, 2004

24. Sep 7, 2005 3:22 PM

in response to: minderbinder

Re: iPod nano - ONLY USB 2.0?

Apple won't abandon firewire. Also, Apple will never ever switch to Intel. Err....

I agree that the bottom-located headphone jack is a bit strange, but I think the answer is in the picture of the lanyard, which appears to be a combined lanyard/headphone set, connecting to the bottom. For lanyard use, upside down does make sense (since you flip it up to control it). I guess they are thinking everyone will use it that way. Problem is, since your nano is upside down, so is the screen - somewhere they say how, when worn, the nano's screen will really show off for others. Err... except that the screen will be upside down, and thus will everything you are "showing off". Oops. I suppose if they had an orientation detection feature that would flip the screen automatically, that would resolve it, but since there's no mention of that it wouldn't seem to, and who would want to pay for that anyway?

And about that lanyard/headphone thing as seen in the pictures. Can you plug in other headphones, or are you stuck with Apple's pathetic ones for lanyard use? Or is that picture just a trick and really there's still the need to plug in the headphones?

Oh well I can't see side-grading anyway. I have a 4 GB mini. It's already quite small, looks nice, is entirely skip free (I've certainly never heard it skip - has anyone?) and it's green. The nano is smaller, and does look nice even though only white or black, perhaps even nicer, but I can't see "upgrading" to an iPod of the same capacity, even ignoring the dramatically slower syncing I'd experience (at USB 1.1 speeds). I struggle with 4 GB as it is.

mdawson

3,028 posts since
Aug 31, 2004

26. Sep 7, 2005 3:39 PM

in response to: MW Forums

Apple Ed deal broken

I just checked the Apple Education Store and while there are still banners for the free iPod mini with a Mac there is no way to order one. I would think that Apple would at least honor their advertising and keep the iPod mini available through this particular channel until the end of the promotion. I really wanted to get a free silver iPod mini for my friend. Oh well.

Sure I could get her the iPod nano, but it would have half the storage capacity at the $179 educational price. Apple needs to fix this situation becuase it has become a bait and switch for those people that knew about the deal but planned on buying some time in the next two weeks as I do.

“Cannot run out of time. There is infinite time. You are finite. Zathras is finite. This is wrong tool.” 2.3GHz Power Mac G5/4GB/500GB HDD/OS X 10.4.11/30-inch ACD, 60GB iPod (Color)

chewygoat

213 posts since
Sep 2, 2004

27. Sep 7, 2005 3:53 PM

in response to: mdawson

Re: iPod nano - ONLY USB 2.0?

Isn't USB an Intel thing? Firewire isn't. Perhaps there is your motivation for why Apple might drop firewire from Intel Macs - part of the deal with Intel?

mdawson

3,028 posts since
Aug 31, 2004

28. Sep 7, 2005 4:23 PM

in response to: chewygoat

Re: iPod nano - ONLY USB 2.0?

Do you honestly think that Apple is going to forfeit their headway into the professional video production market to appease Intel? Apple supports USB and is responsible for the proliferation of USB devices on the market. It is not as if Macs have FireWire at the expense of providing USB; both interfaces coexist on the Mac and have done so for about seven years. As I stated originally, Intel chipsets support FireWire, it is Wintel PC OEMs that do not, excepting the growing presence of FireWire in Wintel laptops. It is highly improbable that Apple will abandon FireWire as it is an obvious step in the wrong direction. FireWire support on the Macintosh platform is not married to the iPods support or lack of support for the interface.

“Cannot run out of time. There is infinite time. You are finite. Zathras is finite. This is wrong tool.” 2.3GHz Power Mac G5/4GB/500GB HDD/OS X 10.4.11/30-inch ACD, 60GB iPod (Color)

Actions

More Like This