View Full Version : wanted bigger ipod mini not smaller nano
north atlantic
09-07-2005, 06:16 PM
i was hoping for a 8gb mini not somthing smaller, they should have made the mini ipod with a bigger hardrive and bigger colr screen. somthings just cant be made small, like cars for example. no one would buy a nano car would they.
gravydrive
09-07-2005, 06:31 PM
you are wrong. i prove my case with the picture. small is the new big. heck, ill be buying one of these someday. i think they're awesome as frick, and i wouldnt be surprised if they come out with something between the nano and 20gb soon...
perfmode
09-07-2005, 06:37 PM
The nano is what the shuffle should have been. I'm liking it.
jonnyk429
09-07-2005, 06:37 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if they would. They have another show later this month. I think its the 17th
There already is an iPod with a bigger hard drive and a bigger screen. Its called an iPod. :D
krzymono
09-07-2005, 07:01 PM
Sorry for the double post.
krzymono
09-07-2005, 07:01 PM
Originally posted by north atlantic
i was hoping for a 8gb mini not somthing smaller, they should have made the mini ipod with a bigger hardrive and bigger colr screen. somthings just cant be made small, like cars for example. no one would buy a nano car would they.
I'm so on the same boat right now. I have just over 6GB of music right now. This is making it really tough on me. 20GB is too big, 4 GB is too small. :(
glockster
09-07-2005, 07:02 PM
Looks good to me. Would buy if it had FireWire support. I'd also buy a mini if it had photo support.
(Both of my PowerBooks have USB 2.0. I prefer FireWire and just paid for the extras for an iPod Color 60GB, a gift for my son. All of his five (?) Macs also support USB 2.0.)
I like FireWire, developed by Apple. It's the best all around digital use protocol. I use USB 2.0 for my scanner and printer. FireWire is an Apple developed protocol. USB was developed by Intel which has pushed USB 2.0 very hard.
As a Mac user I'm obviously a bit predjudiced. :)
ForeverG5
09-07-2005, 07:15 PM
The Nano is what the Shuffle should've been/should be. The shuffles might start to sell like crap now. Oh well...
I have a 6GB Mini, but I might get a white 2GB Nano for exercising, and bringing to school.
Jump_Blueberry
09-07-2005, 07:37 PM
Ehm... you can make cars smaller... See picture of the "Elephant-rollerblade" above ;)
BTW: Poor cat!
But this 2GB-iPod is perhaps filling a gap in the market!
Perhaps there are people (kids...christmas) who don't need a bigger HD!
I'd need a bigger one... otherwise I already have an iPod color... so I don't really NEED it...
Jump_Blueberry
09-07-2005, 07:39 PM
Ehm... you can make cars smaller... See picture of the "Elephant-rollerblade" above ;)
BTW: Poor cat!
But this 2GB-iPod is perhaps filling a gap in the market!
Perhaps there are people (kids...christmas) who don't need a bigger HD!
I'd need a bigger one... otherwise I already have an iPod color... so I don't really NEED it...
Jump_Blueberry
09-07-2005, 07:39 PM
Ehm... you can make cars smaller... See picture of the "Elephant-rollerblade" above ;)
BTW: Poor cat!
But this 2GB-iPod is perhaps filling a gap in the market!
Perhaps there are people (kids...christmas) who don't need a bigger HD!
I'd need a bigger one... otherwise I already have an iPod color... so I don't really NEED it...
talksalot81
09-07-2005, 08:25 PM
I can see sense in this move, the shuffle is cheaper and lower capacity so still will suit many. The nano is immediately after and thus caters for the higher end of the low capacity market. The ipod then fills in after.
Apple will no doubt have researched the capacities people want. If a significant fraction have below 4G of data, it makes sense to have a load of devices down here. I suspect you will find that most people will fall into 2 categories: low capacity and high capacity. I would imagine the mid user to be negligible in comparison, hence it would make more sense that apples strategy is for the mid user to be forced into a choice, rather than presenting the huge lower capacity user with the possibility of having to buy an 8Gb device which is much too big.
Smart move in my view.
Adam
talksalot81
09-07-2005, 08:32 PM
I can see sense in this move, the shuffle is cheaper and lower capacity so still will suit many. The nano is immediately after and thus caters for the higher end of the low capacity market. The ipod then fills in after.
Apple will no doubt have researched the capacities people want. If a significant fraction have below 4G of data, it makes sense to have a load of devices down here. I suspect you will find that most people will fall into 2 categories: low capacity and high capacity. I would imagine the mid user to be negligible in comparison, hence it would make more sense that apples strategy is for the mid user to be forced into a choice, rather than presenting the huge lower capacity user with the possibility of having to buy an 8Gb device which is much too big.
Smart move in my view.
Adam
talksalot81
09-07-2005, 08:33 PM
I can see sense in this move, the shuffle is cheaper and lower capacity so still will suit many. The nano is immediately after and thus caters for the higher end of the low capacity market. The ipod then fills in after.
Apple will no doubt have researched the capacities people want. If a significant fraction have below 4G of data, it makes sense to have a load of devices down here. I suspect you will find that most people will fall into 2 categories: low capacity and high capacity. I would imagine the mid user to be negligible in comparison, hence it would make more sense that apples strategy is for the mid user to be forced into a choice, rather than presenting the huge lower capacity user with the possibility of having to buy an 8Gb device which is much too big.
Smart move in my view.
Adam
morning_glory
09-07-2005, 08:59 PM
I want an 8/10 gig iPod! How hard is that Apple?
jonnny
09-07-2005, 09:27 PM
Originally posted by morning_glory
I want an 8/10 gig iPod! How hard is that Apple? Not hard at all--they already did it with their 1G/2G/3G 10GB iPod way back when. Go grab yourself one for cheap. :p
FunkSlap89
09-07-2005, 09:34 PM
I think the black is friggin sexy!! I think its perfect. I'm lovin' it!
trenzterra
09-07-2005, 09:36 PM
Originally posted by AppleOfMyEye
The Nano is what the Shuffle should've been/should be. The shuffles might start to sell like crap now. Oh well...
I have a 6GB Mini, but I might get a white 2GB Nano for exercising, and bringing to school. Well I got a shuffle for that exact same purpose and a 4GB mini to carry my library around. Bleh.
canyonblue737
09-07-2005, 09:47 PM
iPod shuffle remains a way for people to get "into" the iPod community and even more critically play iTunes AAC files for only $99 or less. It was wise not to replace it, but next year they have to add a small screen that at a minimum shows the title of the song, even if not adding any way to navigate.
iPod mini would have been simply decimated had it remained after the iPod nano appeared. The iPod nano is FAR more attractive, has the color screen, and "looks" like what people imagine when looking for a iPod. Sure the iPod mini would have increased storage but I think Apple is rapidly discovering that their average customer has far less music than you would imagine and likes iPods for their looks and functionality more than their storage.
the iPod nano is a huge winner.
north atlantic
09-07-2005, 09:58 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jump_Blueberry
[B]Ehm... you can make cars smaller... See picture of the "Elephant-rollerblade" above ;)
BTW: Poor cat!
well im like 6 foot 1 so i have problems fitting into cars they make now. allso the nano looks fragile being so thin, i dont know what would happen if somone sat on one, but it probally wouldnt turn out good
north atlantic
09-07-2005, 10:03 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jump_Blueberry
[B]Ehm... you can make cars smaller... See picture of the "Elephant-rollerblade" above ;)
BTW: Poor cat!
well im like 6 foot 1 so i have problems fitting into cars they make now. allso the nano looks fragile being so thin, i dont know what would happen if somone sat on one, but it probally wouldnt turn out good
sorry double post
bobb-mini
09-07-2005, 10:49 PM
I second for the 8/10 gig mini. Don't want a full size POD. Oh well.
if they separate the market into two user groups that severely, they also risk alienating people who want a bit more space than 4gb but don't really want 20gb or more. If someone's got a music collection of 6gb and isn't likely to get much more music but would like to have some extra space to store documents then I don't really see them getting a 20gb iPod, but I reckon they'd get a 10gb one if it was available.
It would be interesting if they had limited edition mid-capacity iPods but they'd probably be expensive to produce. Would be interesting to see if there was demand for it.
IlIlIlIlIl
09-08-2005, 12:56 AM
i dont even think flash drives go up to 10gigs. If you want a 10gig, ebay for a 3rd gen or something.
viccles
09-08-2005, 02:36 AM
I can understand Ipods move not to replace the shuffle. I can also understand the move to replace the mini however in the back of my mind I think they should have kept the mini going as well. Wasnt that long ago the 2g of mini's came out!
viccles
09-08-2005, 02:36 AM
Sorry double post
Unwinking Orb
09-08-2005, 02:24 PM
I totally agree that releasing a more expensive ipod with less capacity (however cute it is) is pandering to the fashion conscious ipodders amongst us. My partner wanted an ipod mini, but having to spend another £40 on the same capacity just so you can view photos (which lets face it- few of us probably do) doesn't make sense.
Like the black though...............
Unwinking Orb
09-08-2005, 02:24 PM
I totally agree that releasing a more expensive ipod with less capacity (however cute it is) is pandering to the fashion conscious ipodders amongst us. My partner wanted an ipod mini, but having to spend another £40 on the same capacity just so you can view photos (which lets face it- few of us probably do) doesn't make sense.
Like the black though...............
Mercuttio
09-08-2005, 05:39 PM
Honestly, I know a great many people with 20 gig iPods who have less than 3 gigs of music on them.
Originally posted by Unwinking Orb
I totally agree that releasing a more expensive ipod with less capacity (however cute it is) is pandering to the fashion conscious ipodders amongst us. My partner wanted an ipod mini, but having to spend another £40 on the same capacity just so you can view photos (which lets face it- few of us probably do) doesn't make sense.
Like the black though............... Yeah, I like the black too. A year ago I complained about how the white iPods didn't match anything but my coffeemaker; I thought black would be much classier looking. I was, of course, pounced upon by the fanboys.
Then again, now my coffee maker is black!
Anyway, its not just fashion - the nano is much smaller & lighter, and will be far easier to carry around. The mini really was only about 1/3 smaller than the big iPod, and had 1/5th the space...and when it came out, 2/3 the battery life, for only $50 less. That was a pretty lousy deal!
Also, the fact that its flash should definitely be worth something. Hard disks have a fairly high failure rate; they were never designed to be flung around or dropped.