So lemme get this straight.

Discussion in 'iPod classic, nano, etc.' started by fuzzie12, Sep 1, 2010.

  1. fuzzie12

    fuzzie12 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2008
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    Device:
    2G iPod touch
    So lemme get this straight:
    • This device is, without the clip, almost exactly as thick as the previous iPod nano
    • It acts like an iPod touch but it doesn't have internet access
    • It doesn't have video playback
    • It doesn't have a speaker at all
    • There's no camera anywhere
    • It doesn't have any preinstalled games
    • And there aren't any games you can buy.
    What the hell was Apple thinking?!?
  2. halolordkiller3

    halolordkiller3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,051
    Likes Received:
    109
    Device:
    iPhone 5 (White)
    if u want all that, go buy and itouch then? lol some ppl dont want all of that in a device, others do which is why they have multiple IPod's. If it had all of that in it, they would jack up the price on it
  3. fuzzie12

    fuzzie12 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2008
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    Device:
    2G iPod touch
    The point is that all of the iPod nanos are still more portable than the iPod touch. Touch screen aside, the older 5th gen iPod nano, with the same price, is far more advanced than this.
  4. Xhiea

    Xhiea Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2009
    Messages:
    740
    Likes Received:
    0
    Device:
    iPad w/ 3G
    "more portable"

    What is unportable about the ipod touch? Its slightly bigger, it still fits pretty much anywhere...
  5. b777forever

    b777forever Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    5,099
    Likes Received:
    344
    Device:
    iPhone
    Nothing, they made a good product into a crappy one.
  6. _JKK_

    _JKK_ Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Messages:
    9,514
    Likes Received:
    1,366
    Device:
    iPhone 5S
    i personally like the idea of it.

    But then again, I kind of wish they killed Classic, made this new Nano a new product all together, and updated the older Nano.

    But oh well.
  7. tanktan38

    tanktan38 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Messages:
    1,085
    Likes Received:
    15
    Device:
    3G iPod touch
    I think this thing should almost be a shuffle. And i'm with JKK, they should just kill the Classic and make people buy a Nano.
  8. xcdjy

    xcdjy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Messages:
    250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Device:
    4G iPod touch
    I think the nano is simply an experiment. The more I look at it, the more I wonder if they're experimenting with a quick cash-in gimmick. By giving it an iPhone/iPt "look" but almost none of the features, they could make quite a few sales I reckon.
  9. JKJones

    JKJones Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2010
    Messages:
    2,102
    Likes Received:
    245
    Device:
    iPhone 5 (Black)
    itd be a pretty sick watch other then that its a worthless downgrade
  10. fuzzie12

    fuzzie12 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2008
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    Device:
    2G iPod touch
    Alright let's see:
    iPod touch: 101 grams
    5th gen iPod nano: 36 grams
    If the iPod touch was just as portable as the nano, the nano would get almost no sales.

    I would take that a somewhat different step and say that I'd be fine if they had this new nano along with the old nano, but I still like the old iPod. Particularly of course for the memory. I'm planning on getting a classic soon, and I could opt for a 64gb touch, but that would be $150 more for 56 less gb.

    Haha, yeah, what other watch can you rotate the screen of?

Share This Page