Hands on: Multitouch Apple iPod nano review

Hands on: Multitouch Apple iPod nano review | News | TechRadar UK

CLICK ON LINK ABOVE TO SEE PICTURES

Hands on: Multitouch Apple iPod nano review

 

Looks neat, what would make me get one is if it has expandable memory via micro sd or something but I bet it does not have that and you have to fork out large amounts of cash to get a model with enough memory to hold a decent collection of songs.

Whats more that I would like to see that I am sure it does not have.

- User replaceable battery

And the last thing that would be neat that it probably cant do

- Ability to play movies

But ultra small touch screen media player priced in the range for the teenage masses? Im sure its going to make a killing even more so just because its apple ipod branding.

 

Yeah, I am totally sick of built in battery`s dying on me and making the mp3 player, ect unusable.

If they can still do user replaceable battery`s on cell phones, they can do it on anything..

 

It should be obvious by now that Apple has no intentions of offering any of their devices with expandable storage. The new Nano comes in 8gb and 16gb which is more than enough for the size of music collection compared to the device.

See point above about expandable storage.

You seriously want to watch a movie on a 1.5" screen???? Come on now, that's just silly!

Remember to charge it on a regular basis and you won't have that problem.

I'm sure Apple will hire you in a second since you seem to have all the answers!

 

This device sucks.

The point of a dedicated music player is to play music.
Having to unlock the device and actually look at the screen to control music playback is a terrible idea. My iPod touch is completely unusable in real-world situations unless I install VolumeButtonExtender or GlovePod.

 

While you may not find a use for it, to say it sucks is certainly a stretch. While some people prefer a tactile interface, there are those who prefer touch and interactivity. Neither is right or wrong but simply personal preference.

Comments such as this are pointless unless you explain your supportive reasoning.

 

his reasoning is that he wants to be able to control the music without needing to interact with a display.

basically- you will want a music player from a different vendor, or an ipod shuffle.

 

Or use headphones from Apple which include controls on the cord.

 

i think you can also get inline controls from the 3rd party manufacturers to use with any pair of headphones.

 

Yup!

Griffin Technology: Navigate - Inline Controller and FM Radio for iPhone and iPod

 

I think it's a awesome concept, but IMO its success might be a hit or miss just like the previous generation button-less Shuffles. Most people still prefer physical buttons on a music player, but if it has to be touch then the much bigger Touch is there to fill the gap and offer much more features. I just think a lot of people with big hands are going to have problems navigating back and forth in the menu system.

 

Actually, I did explain myself. I believe you don't know the meaning of the word "pointless" (hint - it isn't "saying things that are not popular/saying things I don't agree with").

The only thing that is even remotely pointless in this thread is you playing the Apple apologist.

 

LOL I wondered when someone was going to play the pathetic apologist/fan boy card. Congrats!! You win!!

I don't recall anywhere that I specifically voiced an opinion regarding the new Nano, so how exactly does that make me an apologist when I would never buy one to begin with simply because I think a 1.5" screen is nearing unusable. Granted, there will be a market for it, however I'm not part of that market.

 

There is no need to call other member names or pressure other members to explain their opinions if you do not agree with them.

That said, it is good to see companies such as Apple explore new terrain. Just as fr4c mentioned before, the new iPod nano is an awesome concept. Sure, it is impractical in some areas as a mini music player (such as lack of physical buttons), but it is experiments such as these that move technology forwards.

The original iPod is an excellent example of this, at first sight, the click wheel for navigation is very un-intuitive for navigating play lists compared to simple straight forward navigation buttons. But it turned out to be amazing for the task.

 

Apple branded headphones are the bane of the existence of MP3 players and giving music players a horrible name. Hearing loss in teens has gone up 10-fold since Apple started disguising $10 headphones with a $40-$80 price tag.

As for the Nano, I don't think the removal of video is a huge deal. Very few people used that feature to begin with. The ones that do already own one so the point is moot.

I love that the iPod touch has the cameras added, finally. The iPod touch is almost a perfect music player with the fact that it has one massive downfall - it can't play music to save it's life. The sound processor in that thing was like an afterthought or something.

Now if only they could fix the horrid money-sink they called the iPad. You can never buy a first-generation Apple product; they've seriously redefined planned obsolescence.

 

But isn't that the point of an Internet forum? Question someone's opinion to perhaps gain a better understanding of it, even if you still disagree with it?

So we should blame Apple because teens don't know enough to turn the volume down themselves?

Now this is just absurd IMO, and the sheer sales volume of iPads supports my opinion. There is nothing wrong with the iPad in it's current form. I'm finding myself use it more and more compared to my Mac simply because it goes with me everywhere and it's always connected to the Internet.

When I first got it I thought that I'd miss having a camera, however I truly haven't missed it at all. Not once have I ever genuinely wished my iPad had a camera in it because I always have my iPhone with me too. They work hand in hand together for me and what one doesn't have, the other does.

 

There are a few problems with cheap headphones, volume isn't really one of them. The main problem is that earphones with drivers that cannot fully reproduce a full spectrum of sound. When clipping occurs, the effect of the frequency is multiplied. When it happens on cheaper earphones, the damage is done to the audible spectrum of hearing. This is why many people who use headphones experience ringing at a high frequency and often cannot hear low frequencies at all.

Volume and hearing damage comes into effect more when dealing with in-ear buds. The sound waves are compressed directly against the ear drum with high amounts of pressure. The problem with cheaper headphones is that they need to be driven at a much louder volume to give the same experience as a professional pair, which even at a moderate level will cause hearing damage after prolonged use. Professional headphones are open designs which let air circulate freely.

As for the iPad, of course people bought it anyways just to show that they have one. Basically all of Apples products sell because of this. It's pointless to carry both an iPad and an iPhone when the phone does everything the iPad can do plus a whole lot more in a much more convenient package, especially with the new resolution of the iPhone 4.

 

But it still boils down to teens listening to them way too loud, regardless of whether they're Apple headphones, or more expensive over the ear headphones. Stop trying to blame Apple for something completely not their fault.

Oh yes this must be the only reason Apple sells products. I mean, nothing they make is ever USEFUL!! Think about what you say before you make yourself look even more silly!!

Ever tried using Remote Desktop to connect to a computer on the iPhone? Absolutely useless!! Atleast with the iPad you can see the whole screen at any given moment where as with the iPhone you spend most of your time zooming in and out.

 

I bought a new fifth generation Nano a few months ago and am very happy with it. It replaced my third-gen Nano with only 4 GB. I mainly use my Nano for running and I have it paired with Sennheiser bar headphones from the Apple Store with inline controls. One thing that I like about the clickwheel is that I can change the song without having to take the Nano out of my pocket.

I also put a few videos on the Nano and use it to watch them when I'm waiting for my wife while she is shopping or waiting for the kids at some event. The screen is good enough for some watching. It's nicer to watch on the iPad but I don't always have my iPad with me.

I do sometimes take videos too. Family events or just catching the kids in candid moments is nice.

And I like the feel of the old Nano in my hands. It's pretty easy to operate the clickwheel in one hand. The picture of the new Nano on the Apple page has me wondering if you can operate it with one hand.

I wonder if I should buy a second fifth generation model while they still have them at the store. I have no plans to buy a sixth generation model.

 

Boy, this thread turned bad quickly. I have no need for a new iPod but decided to read the thread to see what everyone was saying. Sorry to the bashers but Kris is correct on many points. While its fine to have problems with a product, taking things to the extreme weakens your credibility. Claiming that Apple is the cause of people losing hearing is absurd, saying people only buy Apple products just to show off is nothing but flame bait and calling people names doesn't make your argument any better. If you hate Apple, your best bet is to avoid Apple forums and find something better to do with your time. If you are unhappy with an Apple product or feature, go ahead and state your opinion but don't make outrageous claims and think nobody is going to call you out on it.

 

Actually it's (surprisingly?) true in so very many cases. At least in the US.

That said, I kind of like the new nano. But so many smartphones these days can play mp3s... so meh.

 

Oh come on now. You're just being silly. People buy Apple products because they a) have a need/want for them, b) see the value in them, c) don't find any other product that fits their need.

While some people will buy Apple products to look cool, the larger population of Apple users buy products without their self-image in mind.

 

I guess that means you can say most PC owners are cheap. There are going to be people who buy Mac for status and those who buy PCs because they are cheap but it if far from the norm.

 

I don't see how that implies from what I wrote. *Almost* everyone will buy a Mac for the looks. Which is fine, it does look pretty good. And pretty unique, apart from recent influx of HP Envys. It took me 1 afternoon of moving my stuff in Mac boxes across the campus to realize that.

Wow... you guys ARE brainwashed by Apple.... Almost feel sorry. Almost. People are shallow, and Apple knows how to advertise to that kind of people.

If you buy a Mac because you NEED it, you really have very specific needs. (Building iPhone apps?) You can do anything on either Mac or PC. You buy it because it looks good, and probably (or hopefully) because the build quality is superior to pretty much anything else on the market. And given that, the price isn't that high. ALthought far from Macs having a "value" ... they aren't THAT cheap. But I'd guess you meant... people buy Macs for the same reason they buy iPad - they're freaking dumb.

 

Pardon me if I'm wrong, but are you trying to start a flame war here?

 

You're allowed your opinion, even if it's not completely accurate. I bought my first Mac because of OSX, not because it came in a pretty wrapper. The biggest percentage of people who buy a Mac because of their looks are the same people who insist on trying to only run Windows on it.

Can't find any better retort to the logical points offered you so automatically people are brainwashed by Apple? Get off your soap box before I come and push you.

While you can do a lot of similar tasks on both platforms, the WAY you perform those tasks isn't necessarily the same, nor is the total upkeep of the system the same.

While some people will buy a Mac for the looks initially, they will keep buying a Mac because of the total package which includes OSX.

Now you've completely lost all credibility. Yet another example of when you're provided logical points and you have no valid reply, you lash out, this time by saying iPads are "freaking dumb". You fail!

 

After all the Khris' comments, this is what you get - *I* am the one starting a flame war? You gotta be kidding me! The answer is no. I am trying to start these people using their own brain (for a change). But as Khris pointed out - I did fail in that.

I merely pointed out the OBVIOUS fact that most people buy Macs (read carefuly, most - not all. No Khris, you are not all. Can you process that sentence?) because they look good and they are build well. And they do. But apart from that - there isn't anything that special about Macs. In fact, personally, I'd still buy a Mac laptop DESPITE that I prefer Win7 over OSX. It's neat that you have software + hardware built by the same company so the support for it is good. Apple has made a good rep for themselves so ANYTHING made by Apple will be advertised like crazy (using the words such as, but not limited to, "magical", "sleek", "innovative", etc.) and people will buy it. They have made a name for themselves and anything associated with Apple with automatically mean that. I do agree that, sometimes, SOMETIMES, -not- always - they have good innovations. Web browsing on the iPhone was designed so well, finger gestures on any other phone were sub-par for what - 2 years.

So, to pull the analogy with their other products. What's new about the iPod nano? Nothing really... mp3 players have been on the market for years now. Yet most people won't buy crappy black plastic ones from xxxx manufacturer. Which are much much cheaper, so talk about value... They'll buy iPod because it looks shiny, it's looks artistic and - it says Apple. At least in the younger population of college students, everyone is always "Oooohhh you have Apple!".

 

People are using their own brains, but your goal seems to only insult them by hinting otherwise.

The only thing obvious about your statement above is that it's rubbish!! How do you know most people buy Macs because they look good? Where is your data to support this asinine conclusion? Heaven forbid that someone would actually buy a Mac for any reason OTHER than it looks pretty! Give yourself a shake.

We disagree.

Hate the game, not the players.

Value is extremely subjective and can't be used to properly compare products. Where one person finds value, another won't.

You're nothing but insulting to many people's intelligence here.

 

I think we understand what unreal25 is trying to say by now, and it is something we've all heard before. Most Mac users are simple folk who cannot think for themselves and like shiny things. Therefore, there is really no need to continue this discussion.

Thread closed.