iPod mini vs. nano

[darkcanuck]

OK, here's my comparison of the mini vs. the nano. I'll list the pros and cons of the nano, as opposed to the mini.

Pros:
-Colour screen (which is, IMO, harder to see unlit than a B+W screen)
-New features (that will likely be added to other recent ipods in the next update)
-Skip Free (except that the mini already has 20 minutes of skip protection; I've personally had it go longer without skipping)
-Smaller

Cons:
-Flash memory is significantly slower than a hard drive
-Flash memory has a set limit of rewrites
-2 gb less storage space at exact same price points as the mini
-Headphone port on the bottom
-No firewire connectivity (not that it matters, because most flash chips will still run ast 80% speed on USB 1.1, because they're so slow in the first place)
-Lower battery life
-Scratch-resistant aluminium replaced with very easily scratching plastic
-No remote connector, so an IR remote will have to be in the form of a dock (therefore, no use of Apple's dock if you want a remote)

Seriously, I've never been so unimpressed at an Apple release until today. I've stood by everything and taken it with a smile, even if it seemed like a rediculous idea, because I figured that it would eventually work out in the end. But downgrading their most succesful product line? What were they thinking? Even the most mindless of iPod users are going to notice a double (or 1.5x) in price per model increase.

Not to mention they butchered the iTunes interface and released that god-awful phone (which charges twice as much per song, and has a cap at 100, even if you don't fill it).

The worst part is that very few seem to notice these things. It seems like everyone is following Apple like a flock of sheep. They could charge an extra $500 for the full sized ipod, but as long as they added some mundane feature, everyone would find it amazing.

[machima]

Originally posted by darkcanuck

Seriously, I've never been so unimpressed at an Apple release until today. I've stood by everything and taken it with a smile, even if it seemed like a rediculous idea, because I figured that it would eventually work out in the end. But downgrading their most succesful product line? What were they thinking? Even the most mindless of iPod users are going to notice a double (or 1.5x) in price per model increase.

Not to mention they butchered the iTunes interface and released that god-awful phone (which charges twice as much per song, and has a cap at 100, even if you don't fill it).

The worst part is that very few seem to notice these things. It seems like everyone is following Apple like a flock of sheep. They could charge an extra $500 for the full sized ipod, but as long as they added some mundane feature, everyone would find it amazing.

While I disagree with many of your Pro's and Con's points, you've taken the words right out of my mouth with the rest of what you said. I'm extremely dissapointed with the Nano, and will be seeking an alternative MP3 player for my next purchase. Flash memory is still too expensive to be viable in large quantities.

[Jaged]

Originally posted by darkcanuck
OK, here's my comparison of the mini vs. the nano. I'll list the pros and cons of the nano, as opposed to the mini.

Pros:
-Colour screen (which is, IMO, harder to see unlit than a B+W screen)Most people much perfer a color screen to a B&W screen.
-New features (that will likely be added to other recent ipods in the next update)
-Skip Free (except that the mini already has 20 minutes of skip protection; I've personally had it go longer without skipping)
-Smaller

Cons:
-Flash memory is significantly slower than a hard drive Only about 20-30% slower. Once you copy your songs to your new ipod it wont matter.
-Flash memory has a set limit of rewritesYeah... you can only rewrite it about a million times. You would have to rewrite your iPod nano once every min for two years.
-2 gb less storage space at exact same price points as the mini
-Headphone port on the bottomNew products usualy cost a bit more. The price will drop eventualy if $50 makes that much of a difference to you.
-No firewire connectivity (not that it matters, because most flash chips will still run ast 80% speed on USB 1.1, because they're so slow in the first place)What computer dosen't have a USB port?
-Lower battery lifeYeah, one hour lower. Is the drop from 15 to 14 really that big of a deal?
-Scratch-resistant aluminium replaced with very easily scratching plasticYeah, but it looks so much cooler its worth it.
-No remote connector, so an IR remote will have to be in the form of a dock (therefore, no use of Apple's dock if you want a remote)Not an issue for me, I could see some people being annoyed at this though.

Seriously, I've never been so unimpressed at an Apple release until today. I've stood by everything and taken it with a smile, even if it seemed like a rediculous idea, because I figured that it would eventually work out in the end. But downgrading their most succesful product line? What were they thinking? Even the most mindless of iPod users are going to notice a double (or 1.5x) in price per model increase.

Not to mention they butchered the iTunes interface and released that god-awful phone (which charges twice as much per song, and has a cap at 100, even if you don't fill it).Im sure someone will make a crack alowing you to use the rest of that space soon enough.

The worst part is that very few seem to notice these things. It seems like everyone is following Apple like a flock of sheep. They could charge an extra $500 for the full sized ipod, but as long as they added some mundane feature, everyone would find it amazing.
See bold in quote for my replies.

[Jaged]

Edit: oops, double post

[bobb-mini]

I agree an evolution than a revolution.

As far as the "so much cooler look..." I dunno, isn't that just like a thinner standard iPOD? OK it was cool when it was first released in 2001, but it feels dated now.

I recently saw a "used" iPOD, surface dirty and scratched and ewww. Guessing the plastic casing needs more maintenance to keep the "cool" look.

[canyonblue737]

the iPod nano =

a 100% full featured iPod including a color screen, with the CLASSIC look of the iPod, and a small size that has to be seen to be believed. the flash memory speed and battery life "issues" are not issues at all and 99.9999% of users won't notice either. the lack of storage capacity is a bigger issue, but again most users won't care and the size vs. looks/features is well worth the capacity trade off IMHO.

guys just looking at the iPod nano and knowing it does everything an iPod color does... how can you say iPod mini could even compete? have you seen it?

[madmaxmedia]

Yes, Walt Mossberg of the WSJ is a Apple sheep as well...

Grab a standard American business card. Now, get a pair of scissors and trim the long side of the card by 20%. That's all the space you need to hold over 1,000 songs, plus audio books, podcasts and photos if you buy Apple Computer's newest iPod model, the gorgeous and sleek iPod nano.

This latest iPod was publicly revealed today at a razzle-dazzle marketing event orchestrated by Apple CEO Steve Jobs. But I have been testing a nano for the past few days, and I am smitten. It's not only beautiful and incredibly thin, but I found it exceeds Apple's performance claims.

In fact, the nano has the best combination of beauty and functionality of any music player I've tested -- including the iconic original white iPod. And it sounds great. I plan to buy one for myself this weekend, when it is due to reach stores in the U.S., Europe and Asia.

[dcmacnut]

Originally posted by darkcanuck
Not to mention they butchered the iTunes interface and released that god-awful phone (which charges twice as much per song, and has a cap at 100, even if you don't fill it).

They did change the interface, but it's not butchered. If you are at all familiar with Mac OS X Tiger (the new OS for Macs) all of standard suite of programs have navigated to that new interface, which in my opinion is cleaner and makes Mac user experience more integrated. Of course, it will look out of place on Windows, but you just have to deal.

As far as the phone, the songs cost the same as they due on iTunes. 99 cents. You don't buy the songs with the phone. You buy through iTunes like you normally do and transfer like you would an iPod. Reports of $2 or $3 songs were false.

As far as the 100 song cap, I don't know what brought that one on. However, it is first and foremost a phone, which I presume shares the same storage space with iTunes. So you wouldn't want to fill the phone up completely with songs, otherwise there is no room for contacts and photos and the like you'd take with the phone. I'm only speculating, but that seems to me the best reason for limiting the number of songs. Besides, it's meant to be small and you are meant to swap out songs. iPod shuffle only holds 120 songs. You want more storage, get a regular iPod.

[bobb-mini]

Originally posted by canyonblue737
it does everything an iPod color does...
What can the iPOD color do that the mini can't, beside displaying pix that is? OK so it has a lock code feature but to me it's not that critical. I would only consider must-have if the Color has a much better interface, such as having pop-up screens for example.

[surdy_12]

Originally posted by bobb-mini
What can the iPOD color do that the mini can't, beside displaying pix that is? OK so it has a lock code feature but to me it's not that critical. I would only consider must-have if the Color has a much better interface, such as having pop-up screens for example.


well ya can use ya ipod color to save pics directly from ya digicams (by usin apple camera adapter...)... thats very helpful wen ya trekkin in remote areas and esp if ya dont have a laptop/ya dont wanna take ya laptop... such as the himalayas or sooo (though ya need to buy the belkin battery pack too, coz it sux the ipod battery abit)... i have a 30gb photo n the prime reason i got it was for savin pics --- coz its much cheaper than the memory cards and on top of that its got really good sounds(probably all the ipods mite be havin that good a sound) .
but after usin the photo for sometime , i kinda found it big for normal use , n hence i was plannin to buy a shuffle , but then i came to know bout the APPLE SPECIAL EVENT and hence i waited and im happy i waited ...coz the NANO is mind blowin , smaller , lighter and the best part is that its a flash playa hance even if i sprint(im a pro athlete) really fast , it wouldnt skip or somethin ...

as for the battery life :- ya cant ask for everythin ......
ya have to sacrifice for some things , they wanted to create an ipod wid a screen n click wheel and hence they couldnt decrease the width , but wat they could was decrease the length and thickness to obtain smaller ,lighter ipod and hence they would have been left wid a realtively small space for the battery ...
i dunnno why ya ppl comparin the battery life wid mini :- mini had a monochrome screen which drains less battery and the minis battery is also bigger(much bigger) than the nano's

as for the price :- they should have come wid the same prices , though ... the nano has a color screen(which is more expensive) vs the monochrome screen , and even the flash memory are kinda more expensive than the hard drive conterparts . but i difenately wouldnt mind payin an extra 50bux for it ...

as for the color screen many ppl prefer the color screen , coz its more vivid , attractive and it has better visibilty...

kudos to apple for creatin a player like this mine .... and esp the black color wid the grey click wheel(though i would have prefered the red from U2 version) looks different n coool....
i cant wait to get my hands on this .......

[talksalot81]

Jees.... i'd have to sit down and think to type in such improper english! Assuming i have interpreted correctly, i agree with alot of what you say! The only thing is, until a few people have their hands on to really play with the nano, it is a bit too early to describe it as mindblowing.

Adam

[DoNotEatShuffle]

the only con i see for the nano is that it'll break easier than the mini.

[VTTBoscombe]

For The Nano
Still waiting to get my wife's Pink mini after 4 weeks from Apple after a "Hard Disk Failure" - I can only say roll on Flash memory advances.
Also if you've been following halve the threads about the sound quality differences between flash drives and HDD, ie a Shuffle sounds better than a 60GB Photo, maybe this is a positive advance too.

For The Mini
Apart from that, and seeing as I haven't held a Nano in anger yet, I prefer the look of the Mini (even my Wife's pink one!), My Blue mini's still going strong , and unless the Nano can enlarge it's capacity a lot - can't see it appealing to me in the near future.

I'm taking my Mini out tonight for a drink as he suddenly feels old and on the scrap heap (don't we all,)and needs cheering up.

:mad: :(

[Deslock]

As much as I love OS X, I agree that the Apple/iPod brand-names are a bit over-rated. However, this looks like an excellent little device.

The nano is not just smaller; it's *much* thinner and *much* lighter (less than 1/2 as heavy). I liked the Mini because it offered Apple's awesome wheel interface in a smaller package than the regular iPods. But it was large and hefty compared to other players with similar capacity.

The nano being just 1.5 ounces and .27" thin remedies that. It's also nice that all the edges are beveled, unlike the mini. Having a slightly shorter battery life isn't *that* big a deal (since it reportedly exceeds its 14 hour battery life). I don't see the jack on the bottom as a disadvantage since it means that when you pull it out of a pocket, and hold it up, it'll be oriented the right way.

So we get the traditional iPod advantages (iTunes integration, wheel interface) plus color screen and photo viewing plus no hdd (fragility, skipping, lag, noise) in a thin, lightweight, tiny package. I'm impressed.

If they can build nanos fast enough to keep up with demand, this'll be a big seller... even bigger than the popular iPod mini.

[Mercuttio]

About two weeks ago I decided to jump out of the full size iPod market (see my many posts on the sound of the color iPods) and pick up a mini.
Am I upset that the line has been refreshed? No, and I actually purchased a mini when I did for this exact reason... it felt like change was on the horizon, and I wanted a product I knew for a fact would play music properly and come in at LEAST 6 gigabytes.
I do have to say that I'm tempted by the slick design of the nano, and the new headphone jack (sans video out) is a very exciting thing (since it most likely caused distortion in the larger 'pods), but I really think that the outer shell of the mini really trumps the nano.
I've owned nearly one of each generation of iPod over the years, and the only iPods that seem to be able to stay in good condition under the toughest circumstances are the minis. Aluminum casing has saved my powerbook on many occasions, and I know many who have dropped minis from nasty heights. The mini feels built to last, and I'm not so sure any of my other iPods have.

I hope at some point Apple makes the return to full body Aluminum cases... I would pay an arm and a leg for a "supersized" mini... an iPod the size of a 20-60 gig model that looks identical to the iPod mini.

Oh, and I also like the fact that my mini looks like a shrunken version of my 23" Apple display.

[rrrichie]

the nano does miss one thing the bigger sibblings has. As far as I can discover you cannot transfer pictures from you camera onto the nano. The only way to put pics on there is via iTunes. I hope someone proves me wrong, because this goes beyond me. Why would I want to transfer pictures via iTunes on the nano and not even be able to display them on a TV set.

I really miss the mini already.

[aluren]

i'd say that apple released the nano to market to people that don't have ipods. they're trying to grab a bigger market share. for those people that don't own ipods, the nano is probably the coolest thing out there. to us ipod owners, its nothing new or there's nothing that would make us want to get it since its basically the same ipod, but smaller. someone earlier said it best, its an evolution, not a revolution. if apple is going that trend with the 5g, then i would be extremely disappointed.

[fallenmini]

Hey guys.. im new to the forum and I'd like to just say a few words.
First of all, this site is really kool, love it to get info on apple's music gadgets, being a gadget freak.

Now.. I'm a mini owner. The silver one. Purchased November 2004 from Dixons [UK electronics shop].
I were so happy about my purchase, since it was a small device with a quite satisfying capacity [4GB].

I were the happiest person on earth. I just plugged my mini on my friends PC, and i was incredibly excited with the whole, copy paste and play thing and itunes and everything.
As far as i can remember, iPod was at that time of the year, not so popular around Europe. It was buzzing but not that huge as it is today. The iPod craze has been going on for what? half a year now? In europe talking..

Anyways. A couple of days later, I got on a plane back home and I was thrilled with the portable music player idea. The flight was about 4 hours so, that was my first let's say "connection" with the iPod. From that day since, I love my iPod, having to deal with many hours on the bus and stuff.

Now.. I've seen the Nano yesterday. I WAS THRILLED. I was amazed with the size. And it was crazy I tell you! It's like I wanted it. And I didn't realize my blindness until I read a few posts in here that make you see clearly.

I love my mini.. and I feel disappointed that it's discontinued.
Even if my mini's battery is doing bad and it has a life of 4 hours, from today onwards, I'll love my mini 10 times more than when I first bought it...

I've decided not to buy the NANO afterall.. and stick with my mini. get it a brand new battery. renew it. and buy new accessories for it.

And lastly, I just wanna thank APPLE for introducing NANO and discontinuing mini.
I've appreciated my mini and I just feel sorry that I got all that excited about Nano.


Thanks for the posters in here that made me see that it's another marketing trick..

Peace

andrew.

[letthereberock]

It's not a marketing trick ...

It has a coloured dispay and is very small. That's all I want. I sell my Mini- and buy an NanoPod.

[fallenmini]

why buy it for its colour screen?
it's crazy!
I've got a colour phone with pictures on it.

iPod is a music gadget anyways.

And yes it's a marketing trick until you realise it.

Does size really matters? Or is it just to show off your friends that you got the new NANO?
It's all about showing off the new lil' thingy.
Believe me, when you get to realise that we are all hypnotized, you'll appreciate your mini.

Minis are discontinued. NO WAY i'd sell mine.

Anyways.. i told you. I was all excited.
I just realized it last nite. I was all mad bout iPod nano and I stayed up until midnight even if I had to wake up at 5.00.
Just to learn more about Nano.

It seems that, at the end of the day, Nano is nothing.

[bobb-mini]

Originally posted by Deslock
If they can build nanos fast enough to keep up with demand, this'll be a big seller... even bigger than the popular iPod mini.
Well since killing the mini, people don't have much choice, do they? (I mean street Joe people, who don't feel comfortable with eBay or buying used).

[bobb-mini]

Originally posted by Mercuttio
I hope at some point Apple makes the return to full body Aluminum cases... I would pay an arm and a leg for a "supersized" mini... an iPod the size of a 20-60 gig model that looks identical to the iPod mini.
EVERYBODY have the two-shelves casing, ooh-ump. Mini's hollowed-out, seamless casing, is so, engineering, production, so classic Steve Jobs "no fan on that MAC damit!" the Apple that we grown to love. But what I hate the most is the void left between 4Gig and 20Gig.

ps: Just got a closer inspection of the Nano, and it's a "u" bottom shelf with a flat laminate on top, like a sardine can. Ewwww. I realize most people don't care and probly think I am nuts, but as an engineer, I notice these little design details, and appreciate when they do it like nobody else done it before.

[bluegator]

Originally posted by fallenmini
why buy it for its colour screen?
it's crazy!
I've got a colour phone with pictures on it.

iPod is a music gadget anyways.

And yes it's a marketing trick until you realise it.

Does size really matters? Or is it just to show off your friends that you got the new NANO?
It's all about showing off the new lil' thingy.
Believe me, when you get to realise that we are all hypnotized, you'll appreciate your mini.

Minis are discontinued. NO WAY i'd sell mine.

Anyways.. i told you. I was all excited.
I just realized it last nite. I was all mad bout iPod nano and I stayed up until midnight even if I had to wake up at 5.00.
Just to learn more about Nano.

It seems that, at the end of the day, Nano is nothing.

Gee. Thanks for clearing that up. I could've sworn it was an iPod, but you say it's nothing? Well, thank God for you.

Something tells me you get to walk around all day with a backpack or bookbag or whatever kids call them today. I, on the other hand, need to be able to store my iPod out of site when in meetings. Believe it or not, tiny is good and does serve a purpose.

So...before you make sweeping statements about a product that doesn't fit YOUR needs how about you stay up until midnight again and give it some real thought?

[bobb-mini]

Originally posted by surdy_12
if ya dont have a laptop/ya dont wanna take ya laptop... such as the himalayas
If u EVER go trekking to te Himalayas, I STRONGLY recommend not taking pictures with your cellphones or similar gadget but take an honest-to-God SLR with a pouchful of lenses and other accessories 'cuz u will need them.

[davsug]

I have a 20GB 4G iPod, a 1GB Shuffle (soon to be eBay'd), my wife has a new 4GB mini, and I just got the 2GB black Nano. While I agree that this is an evolution instead of revolution, I think it's as big a step as they made when the Mini was released. It's tiny (half the thickness of the Shuffle, about 75% the size of the mini), it has all the functionality of one of the larger, color iPods (minus some external capabilities), and it looks beautiful. If someone liked the mini, I don't see anything not to be liked or loved in the Nano.

[Jackonicko]

It's a proper iPod (and they've gone back to the beautifully sharp, edgy Gen 1 style), not a girly, Barbie pastel coloured imitation.

It offers something that neither the Mini nor the Shuffle can - it's skip-free, genuinely exercise resistant (unlike the Mini), and with a proper display and reasonable capacity (unlike the Shuffle).

It's the ideal complement to a full sized iPod, and is a better-looking, easier-to-use option than a Shuffle or a 4 GB Mini.

And the only colour option is classy, understated black.

[CaNCeRiaN]

Hey all ..
some of you bought the Nano and they already have the Mini, what do you think ??

[davsug]

There's a very detailed thread about this a little further down the page...check it out

[ai42]

I'm sorry but personally I think it is a stupid question. The Shuffle is small yes, but no screen and no touchpad barely qualifies it as an iPod. Now the Nano is just uber cool with a color screen, touchpad, and less than half the volume of two shuffles and holds up to 8 times the capacity.

I think the question you need to ask yourself is the Nano worth another $70 to $150 (depending upon capacity of course). Personally for me the answer is a resounding YES.

[zarvox]

The question was nano vs. mini, not nano vs. shuffle. Both of which already have tons of discussion.

[Infinity]

Originally posted by ai42
I'm sorry but personally I think it is a stupid question. The Shuffle is small yes, but no screen and no touchpad barely qualifies it as an iPod. Now the Nano is just uber cool with a color screen, touchpad, and less than half the volume of two shuffles and holds up to 4 times the capacity.

I think the question you need to ask yourself is the Nano worth another $50 to $150 (depending upon capacity of course). Personally for me the answer is a resounding YES.


Umm, he was asking about the mini, which has a screen (monochrome), better battery life, and can hold more songs (6gb version). Even still, I'd go with the nano - smaller and so damn sexy looking!

[CaNCeRiaN]

Well i asked this coz i just ordered my Mini last week and it will be delivered tomorrow !
If i knew i would have ordered it, but i dont think that the refund policy works with me too coz i engraved it !!

Thats why i was asking here alot away from the discussions just to know in less posts whats ur idea and which is better.

And by the way, im asking the ppl who own both and tried it not just saw it o read about it !

[CaNCeRiaN]

Hey All ..
after reading all these posts i got confused, some liked the Nano and some not !

I just ordered my Mini last week and it will be delievered tomorrow and the Nano now released ! thats wasnt fear from Apple coz they should have atleaset announced about it ..

So now what do u think, Mini or Nano ?

:confused:

And what about the refund policy, will it work for me if my Mini is engraved ?
can i e-mail apple ??

[dcmacnut]

Originally posted by rrrichie
the nano does miss one thing the bigger sibblings has. As far as I can discover you cannot transfer pictures from you camera onto the nano. The only way to put pics on there is via iTunes. I hope someone proves me wrong, because this goes beyond me. Why would I want to transfer pictures via iTunes on the nano and not even be able to display them on a TV set.

I really miss the mini already.
The mini has never supported photo displays (though downloads were possible to the mini, you couldn't display them on the iPod or TV).

The short and long answer to your question is that no, you cannot download photos to the iPod nano directly from camera or media card. Only on the computer.

As far adding that feature, it probably required more hardware (particularly adding A/V out support to the headphone jack) than space in the nano would allow. If you need the ability offload photos directly, go with a regular iPod.

[jstylex0r]

wow you must be really ####ed ordered a mini a week ago and nano came out...
mini isnt even in the same league as nano.. nano is like 1000000 times better.

[surdy_12]

Originally posted by bobb-mini
If u EVER go trekking to te Himalayas, I STRONGLY recommend not taking pictures with your cellphones or similar gadget but take an honest-to-God SLR with a pouchful of lenses and other accessories 'cuz u will need them.

nah , i use my faithfully nikon 8700 and sony W1 , they both are really good , and suit my need and since they take digital memory hence i both the ipod photo to save my pics on them (as i can also use the ipod as a hard drive, backup) this is really good ...

[Infinity]

Originally posted by CaNCeRiaN
Hey All ..
after reading all these posts i got confused, some liked the Nano and some not !

I just ordered my Mini last week and it will be delievered tomorrow and the Nano now released ! thats wasnt fear from Apple coz they should have atleaset announced about it ..

So now what do u think, Mini or Nano ?

:confused:

And what about the refund policy, will it work for me if my Mini is engraved ?
can i e-mail apple ??

I was in the same boat, but was able to return my engraved mini that I had for 13 days to apple to get the nano. Just be sure to stress that had you know the mini was being discontined you would've waited a week to order the nano. You might have to talk to a few people, but you should be able to return it for a full refund - I was. :)

[Code Monkey]

Well, I'm with the original poster: completely unimpressed and underwhelmed by the nano.

Why does Apple assume that style is more important than *basic* function? There's no reason why by making it a bit thicker they couldn't have had battery life measured in days rather than hours and a headphone jack on top where it belongs. Given the choice to trade in my 1G mini for a nano, I'd take my mini.

[Infinity]

The main reason I prefer the nano is looks and that it uses flash memory, so no need to worry about exercising with it.

[JazzyMac]

Originally posted by Code Monkey
Well, I'm with the original poster: completely unimpressed and underwhelmed by the nano.

Why does Apple assume that style is more important than *basic* function? There's no reason why by making it a bit thicker they couldn't have had battery life measured in days rather than hours and a headphone jack on top where it belongs. Given the choice to trade in my 1G mini for a nano, I'd take my mini.

The 1G mini had an 8hr average batterly life that was really 5-6 hours. And who says the headphone jack "belongs" on the top of the player?

[Starboard]

How old are you to have to attack other people to make yourself feel better? The product doesn't appeal to you; fine. Not everything has to be made for everyone. The nano appeals to other people for many other reasons that you haven't even begun to touch on. That doesn't mean they are "sheep".

[Starboard]

Originally posted by Code Monkey
Well, I'm with the original poster: completely unimpressed and underwhelmed by the nano.

Why does Apple assume that style is more important than *basic* function? There's no reason why by making it a bit thicker they couldn't have had battery life measured in days rather than hours and a headphone jack on top where it belongs. Given the choice to trade in my 1G mini for a nano, I'd take my mini.

wait, what? your one complaint is that the battery life isn't as long as it could be, yet given a choice, you'd keep the gen1 mini which has even less of a battery life?

[Starboard]

Originally posted by CaNCeRiaN
Hey All ..
after reading all these posts i got confused, some liked the Nano and some not !

I just ordered my Mini last week and it will be delievered tomorrow and the Nano now released ! thats wasnt fear from Apple coz they should have atleaset announced about it ..

So now what do u think, Mini or Nano ?

:confused:

And what about the refund policy, will it work for me if my Mini is engraved ?
can i e-mail apple ??

if it hasn't shipped you might be able to cancel the order. try calling apple. often time, if the order is within a week, apple will allow you to just get the currently or new announced product.

[audioholic]

Originally posted by VTTBoscombe

Also if you've been following halve the threads about the sound quality differences between flash drives and HDD, ie a Shuffle sounds better than a 60GB Photo, maybe this is a positive advance too.(

:rolleyes: There's no REAL information that Flash memory has superior sound quality over HDD. The best sound quality is achieved by ripping songs straight form CD's in either AIFF or WAV format. It eats up more space but it's worth it to purists.

Downloading songs form iTunes or ripping songs in mp3 format will have a more significant degradation in sound quality than any theory of storage formats. Then again, some people think Bose sound docks are "highend" LOL.

[CaNCeRiaN]

Originally posted by Starboard
if it hasn't shipped you might be able to cancel the order. try calling apple. often time, if the order is within a week, apple will allow you to just get the currently or new announced product.

It will be delievered today ! and its engraved
:(

yesterday i called one of their stores my self and they told me that they wont return it coz its engraved

:(

What to do, i think i will keep the 6GB it has more capacity anyway !

[bronze09]

it seems like you are making a lot of excuses to not like the nano b/c you have the now obsolete mini

design is a HUGE factor in a music player. Sure if it was bigger it could have more batt/life (I don't think most people will be constantly squeezed by 14 hours) but design is important. Would you want a ipod with a two pound battery on it even if it lasted 7 days? Most people wouldn't, and most people are going to like the cool design and 14 hours vs 20 hours of batt. life won't make a big difference.

[CaNCeRiaN]

Well its not about excuses, its about that i blame apple for not annoucing about the Nano instead of making ppl buy the Mini while Nano was in process to be released in just few days after !!

Now i cant refund my Mini bcoz its engraved and it would be syupdi o get 2 mp3 players as one is enough ..

Where should i complain if want ??
which number should i call?

[CaNCeRiaN]

Originally posted by Infinity
I was in the same boat, but was able to return my engraved mini that I had for 13 days to apple to get the nano. Just be sure to stress that had you know the mini was being discontined you would've waited a week to order the nano. You might have to talk to a few people, but you should be able to return it for a full refund - I was. :)

Who did you talk too and what did u exactly tell them ?
i got it on-line, will they refund it to me ??

[freddie-pod]

Originally posted by CaNCeRiaN
Well its not about excuses, its about that i blame apple for not annoucing about the Nano instead of making ppl buy the Mini while Nano was in process to be released in just few days after !!

Now i cant refund my Mini bcoz its engraved and it would be syupdi o get 2 mp3 players as one is enough ..

Where should i complain if want ??
which number should i call?

dude keep the mini.although the nano is smaller it`s design is not as good...the finish will scratch and look greasy...you keep your mini for awhile and wait for apple to add colors,better batt life,and more GB`s then sell your mini and upgrade...

[Code Monkey]

Originally posted by Starboard
wait, what? your one complaint is that the battery life isn't as long as it could be, yet given a choice, you'd keep the gen1 mini which has even less of a battery life? No, I have numerous complaints about the nano:

Only flash memory, if I were going to push the envelope I'd use the same HD/flash combo the mini has but up the flash to provide much longer skip protection and much longer battery life while maintaining fast transfers to the device. I use my 4GB mini to listen to a 160+ GB collection, it's contents are rotated every couple of days, often refreshed daily. An all flash player would drive me bonkers. The nano is designed for people with small collections who won't be messing with the contents of the iPod that often, the mini supported all size collections equally.

I would keep the headphone jack on the top because I can't for the life of me figure out what idiot (Ms J?) is going to argue that it's better to carry our iPods updside down in our pockets.

I would have kept the device larger so that 1) it could have more than a tiny watch sized battery and that 2) it would fit people's hands better. I think the even smaller size is a massive negative, not a plus.

I would not have switched to the same soft acrylic as larger iPods.

So while I wouldn't mind if my battery life were improved, downgrading transfer times and general usability to possess a piece of typical style over substance Apple fluff is not in my future. Feel free to keep praising this underwhelming piece of flash and sparkle, but it's not an improvement over the minis and is a downgrade from my pragmatarian point of view.

[Infinity]

Originally posted by CaNCeRiaN
Who did you talk too and what did u exactly tell them ?
i got it on-line, will they refund it to me ??

I ordered mine online as well. Not sure who I talked to, but the number I dialed was: 800-676-2775. All I said was that I waned to return my mini to get a nano. I also said that I was very dissapointed in the fact I purchased a discontinued product at full price - and had I known about the nano, I would've waited two weeks before ordering. If you don't get anywhere with the first person you talk to, ask to speak with their supervisor. Don't get rude, be very polite and explain your dissatisfaction with the situation. It worked for me, but maybe I just got lucky.

[Infinity]

double post - please delete.

[bluegator]

Originally posted by Code Monkey
No, I have numerous complaints about the nano:

Only flash memory, if I were going to push the envelope I'd use the same HD/flash combo the mini has but up the flash to provide much longer skip protection and much longer battery life while maintaining fast transfers to the device. I use my 4GB mini to listen to a 160+ GB collection, it's contents are rotated every couple of days, often refreshed daily. An all flash player would drive me bonkers. The nano is designed for people with small collections who won't be messing with the contents of the iPod that often, the mini supported all size collections equally.

I ran a test. I filled my nano from a 4GB test playlist. I then loaded the same playlist on my iPod. The times were:

nano = 7:45
iPod = 6:00

1 minute 45 seconds difference. Wow, you must go bonkers easily. I never realized that 1 min 45 sec was the difference between people with a large collection and people with a small collection. How special you are to be such a power user. We all bow to you.


I would keep the headphone jack on the top because I can't for the life of me figure out what idiot (Ms J?) is going to argue that it's better to carry our iPods updside down in our pockets.

An iPod upside down in your pocket! Oh. My. God. It'll be anarchy! We're all so screwed. Dude, you're really reaching for things to hate.

I would have kept the device larger so that 1) it could have more than a tiny watch sized battery and that 2) it would fit people's hands better. I think the even smaller size is a massive negative, not a plus.

It has plenty of battery life. It's an entertainment device, not a pacemaker. Again, I assume you've never used one because it fits my big mits just fine. You want Apple to put a handle and scallop it for your fingers, too? The small size is a godsend. I can easily carry it in a shirt pocket so I don't have to have a case strapped to my waist. Your personal size opinions are valid, but don't make it a failure for Apple.

I would not have switched to the same soft acrylic as larger iPods.

Fair enough. I'm glad they did, you aren't. Just a matter of opinion.

So while I wouldn't mind if my battery life were improved, downgrading transfer times and general usability to possess a piece of typical style over substance Apple fluff is not in my future. Feel free to keep praising this underwhelming piece of flash and sparkle, but it's not an improvement over the minis and is a downgrade from my pragmatarian point of view.

You betray your obvious bias once again. It's an mp3 player for God's sake. It's a great mp3 player. If it was an empty shell that people carried around to look like they have an iPod I could understand your comment. It's a real, honest-to-God mp3 player. That may be hard for you to swallow, but it is. You sound like the rest of the Apple haters that refuse to believe that Apple computers really do work as computers. They aren't just showpieces.


When you're ready to actually debate facts based on actual experience then you'll have some credibility. Until then, you're just a hater (for whatever reason).

[sparks9]

Originally posted by Code Monkey
No, I have numerous complaints about the nano:

Only flash memory, if I were going to push the envelope I'd use the same HD/flash combo the mini has but up the flash to provide much longer skip protection and much longer battery life while maintaining fast transfers to the device. I use my 4GB mini to listen to a 160+ GB collection, it's contents are rotated every couple of days, often refreshed daily. An all flash player would drive me bonkers. The nano is designed for people with small collections who won't be messing with the contents of the iPod that often, the mini supported all size collections equally.

I would keep the headphone jack on the top because I can't for the life of me figure out what idiot (Ms J?) is going to argue that it's better to carry our iPods updside down in our pockets.

I would have kept the device larger so that 1) it could have more than a tiny watch sized battery and that 2) it would fit people's hands better. I think the even smaller size is a massive negative, not a plus.

I would not have switched to the same soft acrylic as larger iPods.

So while I wouldn't mind if my battery life were improved, downgrading transfer times and general usability to possess a piece of typical style over substance Apple fluff is not in my future. Feel free to keep praising this underwhelming piece of flash and sparkle, but it's not an improvement over the minis and is a downgrade from my pragmatarian point of view.

go buy an iriver if you dont like the iPod design. the nano looks more like a real iPod than the mini ever did.

[Sukotsu]

Originally posted by bronze09
it seems like you are making a lot of excuses to not like the nano b/c you have the now obsolete mini

design is a HUGE factor in a music player. Sure if it was bigger it could have more batt/life (I don't think most people will be constantly squeezed by 14 hours) but design is important. Would you want a ipod with a two pound battery on it even if it lasted 7 days? Most people wouldn't, and most people are going to like the cool design and 14 hours vs 20 hours of batt. life won't make a big difference.

Couldnt agree more, but what gets me is why is the fact that the headphone socket is on the bottom such a big deal?

It sits upside down in your pocket (where no-one including yourself can see it)
When you hold the nano the wire dosnt get bent its pointing right at you
It works perfectly with the lanyard earphones
When you put it down on a desk its facing the right way?

They sound like positives to me??

[Audio]

ok, if all of you hate it so much and think its a big backwards step, what if a new company came out with somthing like this?

most poeple would think its great, and has a large batt. life for it size, as well as storage. but because apple were among the first to push large music collegtions you think they should continue.

if it wasnt for things like the 4GB nano then we would of never had the orginal ipod in its (now large) then small form.

its all about advanding. you want a great portable video player that is light and has long battery life? well this is helping it on its way.

[Jackonicko]

"Only flash memory, if I were going to push the envelope I'd use the same HD/flash combo the mini has but up the flash to provide much longer skip protection and much longer battery life while maintaining fast transfers to the device."

You're mad. Any hard drive based player will be more prone to skipping and jogging and will therefore be less well suited to active use. Use a HD to give the kind of capacity you can't provide with flash (eg 20 GB, 40 GB, 60 GB or more). But for smaller capacities, flash has to be best. That's why people bought Shuffles - now they can get a full-featured Flash iPod - with proper clickwheel and color screen.

The iPod Mini was great while 1 GB was the practical limit to Flash, though it always looked like 'BarbiePod' and it badly needed a better headphone amp, and a better screen.

The 'Mini is best' mob are just like those who still whinge on and on about the Gen 3, with it's chav style backlit buttons and pathetic battery life. Move on, guys, get with the programme.

[justinkoko]

Originally posted by darkcanuck
OK, here's my comparison of the mini vs. the nano. I'll list the pros and cons of the nano, as opposed to the mini.

Pros:
-Colour screen (which is, IMO, harder to see unlit than a B+W screen)
-New features (that will likely be added to other recent ipods in the next update)
-Skip Free (except that the mini already has 20 minutes of skip protection; I've personally had it go longer without skipping)
-Smaller

Cons:
-Flash memory is significantly slower than a hard drive
-Flash memory has a set limit of rewrites
-2 gb less storage space at exact same price points as the mini
-Headphone port on the bottom
-No firewire connectivity (not that it matters, because most flash chips will still run ast 80% speed on USB 1.1, because they're so slow in the first place)
-Lower battery life
-Scratch-resistant aluminium replaced with very easily scratching plastic
-No remote connector, so an IR remote will have to be in the form of a dock (therefore, no use of Apple's dock if you want a remote)

Seriously, I've never been so unimpressed at an Apple release until today. I've stood by everything and taken it with a smile, even if it seemed like a rediculous idea, because I figured that it would eventually work out in the end. But downgrading their most succesful product line? What were they thinking? Even the most mindless of iPod users are going to notice a double (or 1.5x) in price per model increase.

Not to mention they butchered the iTunes interface and released that god-awful phone (which charges twice as much per song, and has a cap at 100, even if you don't fill it).

The worst part is that very few seem to notice these things. It seems like everyone is following Apple like a flock of sheep. They could charge an extra $500 for the full sized ipod, but as long as they added some mundane feature, everyone would find it amazing.

//-Flash memory is significantly slower than a hard drive

Slow it may be...but if you actually use it..you'll see..there isn't any practical difference..I transfer the songs just fine within seconds..


-Flash memory has a set limit of rewrites

10,000 to 100,000 rewrite...if you need more than that..just let me know..cuz long before the FALSH goes south..battery will go first anyways..Are you planning to use Nano for more than 5 years? 10 years? I don't think so..plus..this applies to HDD solution too...they aren't made out of titanium..it'll last 5 to 10 years max..

-2 gb less storage space at exact same price points as the mini

well let see..but it's 33% smaller, color screen, solid-state memory...you want all this at the same price?

//-Headphone port on the bottom

Not much of a problem..I guess this can be personal preference..cuz I like the jack on the bottom actually..

-No firewire connectivity (not that it matters, because most flash chips will still run ast 80% speed on USB 1.1, because they're so slow in the first place)

Who needs firewire?? If you got money to buy iPod..go buy yourself a USB port..don't tell me you don't have a USB port..this thing is ubiquitous nowdays...unless you got a 10 year old computer..

-Lower battery life

It's true..18 hr+ battery life on mini is nice..but 14hr is still enough for any normal usage..unless you are going out without a charger for a week or something..I think of it as a nice compensation for smaller size..

-Scratch-resistant aluminium replaced with very easily scratching plastic

This is a definite let down..but I'm responsible enough to handle my gadgets in pristine condition..Go buy yourself a case or just cover it with some transparent plastic sticker..

-No remote connector, so an IR remote will have to be in the form of a dock (therefore, no use of Apple's dock if you want a remote)

When things are this small..I would HATE to have remotes around..no point..

[teh-cut]

I never thought i would buy an ipod of any kind in my life but I'm gonna put down for a nano.
I've always preferred flash players as it seems HD players have so many probelms and the longevity is horrid. My flash players are dropped, kicked, thrown around and they never have any issues.

Finally somebody delivers on a higher capacity flash player. This is the future. Just put on an sd card slot so I can add capacity,share music between ipods, store picts off my digital camera,etc and it would be perfection. Larger capacity players will come out anyway if the 4gb is your concern.

[NanaMcBongBoing]

I work a physical job and cant wait for my nano. I cant tell you how many times my iPod has been either knocked off its clip or pulled off during physical activity. It has gotten to where I stick it in my cleavage in my bra just to keep it from hitting the ground. Unfortuantley, it calls attention to my cleavage.

With the nano, it should be small and light enough that it will fit into an active lifestyle/job. I can keep it in my front pocket without it pulling my blouse open or clip it on my shirt without having to worry about it coming off its clip and hitting the floor.

[sheik124]

Originally posted by NanaMcBongBoing
I work a physical job and cant wait for my nano. I cant tell you how many times my iPod has been either knocked off its clip or pulled off during physical activity. It has gotten to where I stick it in my cleavage in my bra just to keep it from hitting the ground. Unfortuantley, it calls attention to my cleavage.

With the nano, it should be small and light enough that it will fit into an active lifestyle/job. I can keep it in my front pocket without it pulling my blouse open or clip it on my shirt without having to worry about it coming off its clip and hitting the floor.
Whoa, seems like some people really would benefit from the nano :D

[Starboard]

Originally posted by bluegator
I ran a test. I filled my nano from a 4GB test playlist. I then loaded the same playlist on my iPod. The times were:

nano = 7:45
iPod = 6:00

1 minute 45 seconds difference. Wow, you must go bonkers easily. I never realized that 1 min 45 sec was the difference between people with a large collection and people with a small collection. How special you are to be such a power user. We all bow to you.

I agree. For most users, it can take 10 minutes, and the difference wouldn't be all that tangible. You come home at the end of the day, plug your nano into the dock to sync, go on to check/respond to emails, surf the web for news, go microwave some dinner, take a shower, etc. By the time you come back it's long done updating the entire 4gigs of music.

Originally posted by bluegator
An iPod upside down in your pocket! Oh. My. God. It'll be anarchy! We're all so screwed. Dude, you're really reaching for things to hate.

this is another "objection" that sounds like sour grapes. It's upside down in your pocket, makes perfect sense. You stick you hand into your pocket, take out the nano, and it already right side up in your hands.

[freddie-pod]

Originally posted by bluegator


""""I would not have switched to the same soft acrylic as larger iPods"""""

Fair enough. I'm glad they did, you aren't. Just a matter of opinion.


only that one gets a fair enough, it`s just a matter of opinion...yet you attack him on every other point...

it`s all his opinion...

newsflash bluegator,i agree with most everything he says...(my opinion of course)....the design though nice and small,SUCKS!!!jack on the bottom,SUCKS!!!,no colors,SUCKS!!!white on steel,SUCKS!!!

and most of all 2 and 4gb blows big time.....

ill wait.

[letthereberock]

White in steel sucks?!
Go and buy phillips!

[JazzyMac]

Originally posted by Code Monkey
I would keep the headphone jack on the top because I can't for the life of me figure out what idiot (Ms J?) is going to argue that it's better to carry our iPods updside down in our pockets.


Hey, Guy...next time you want to slam me, spell my name out entirely. Ms_Jeeewwwweeellllleeeee

Gotta let it roll off your tongue, Brain. :rolleyes:

:cool:

[jonnyv]

from what i can tell the nano doesnt have the choice of using the remote that can be used with all other ipod's, i like to have my mini in my pocket and be able to use the remote.

if the nano could use the remote then i would order one today

[Code Monkey]

Originally posted by jonnyv
from what i can tell the nano doesnt have the choice of using the remote that can be used with all other ipod's.You are correct, it lacks the proprietary 4-pin connector offset from the phone jack that allows the remote and other top mounting accessories to do their thing. I suspect that like my other complaints, this was driven by their obsession to keep the size to a minimum. Since they couldn't mount the phone jack on top they had to squeeze it and the dock connector on the bottom which gave them the choice of not having that "take a business card and trim 20% off the edge" line from the WSJ that's been repeated all over the web or maintaining capatibility with numerous accessories...

Hmm, style or function? Which will Apple choose? ;)

[Code Monkey]

Originally posted by bluegator
I ran a test. I filled my nano from a 4GB test playlist. I then loaded the same playlist on my iPod. The times were:

nano = 7:45
iPod = 6:00

1 minute 45 seconds difference. Wow, you must go bonkers easily. I never realized that 1 min 45 sec was the difference between people with a large collection and people with a small collection. How special you are to be such a power user. We all bow to you. Then I will stop ####in about the flash for transfer times. Based upon the performance of their shuffle line and flash drives in general your results are surprising and not at all what one would expect.

[JazzyMac]

How many other DAPs have extra ports to plug in remotes, etc.?

I don't know, that's why I'm asking.

[wyneken]

Originally posted by audioholic
:rolleyes: There's no REAL information that Flash memory has superior sound quality over HDD. The best sound quality is achieved by ripping songs straight form CD's in either AIFF or WAV format. It eats up more space but it's worth it to purists.

Downloading songs form iTunes or ripping songs in mp3 format will have a more significant degradation in sound quality than any theory of storage formats. Then again, some people think Bose sound docks are "highend" LOL.

These are all different issues. The type of memory used (flash vs hard drive) should have ZERO effect on the quality of the sound. We are talking about *digital* music -- a series of 1s and 0s -- so unless there is some memory malfunction, any kind of storage device is equally good (from the standpoint of sound quality).

It is true, however, as the earlier poster said, that the Shuffle does have somewhat better sound reproduction, notably in bass response, compared with some other iPod models. This has nothing to do with flash memory. It's due to the different performance of the chips that run these devices -- reading the (identical) bits of digital information from memory, and converting them into electrical sound impulses.

The format used (mp3 vs WAV vs AIF) is a totally different topic. A higher-quality rip will obviously sound better than a lousy one, regardless of what iPod you play it on.

[DoughBoy]

As I read through all of the posts in this thread I have to sit and chuckle a bit. The introduction of the Nano is like the introduction of just about any other product out there. Be it new cars, motorcycles, games, and even with professional athletes, there will always be those who will prefer the old over the new. Don't believe me? Just go to any Internet forum dedicated to a specific vehicle that has just gone through a redesign. You'll find tons of post from people who insist that the older model is far superior to the replacement. Some of these people genuinely prefer the older model (hey, you can't please everyone), some people are afraid of change, some are bitter because they see the new model as a threat to their significant investment, and some are simply angry that they no longer have the hippest model on the block.

Obviously the iPod is a far less costly investment, but you can easily still see the same arguements. In an ideal world they would have kept the mini, since it has obviously been very successful and meets the portable audio needs of many. However, I do strongly feel that the Nano is a much better fit within the iPod line. Looking at it from the 20,000 ft view, if the goal was to give people the extreme portability of the shuffle, but the look & feel of a full size iPod, the Nano fits the bill much better than the Mini.

So, you don't have to agree with the direction of Apple (again, you can't please everyone), but rest assured that a great deal of thought went into the decision. I would find it hard to believe that the designers of the iPod, or vehicles, or any other product sit down and say, "That last model we designed is going to stand as our crowning acheivement. Let's replace it with something mediocre that doesn't meet the needs of our customers!"

[Code Monkey]

Originally posted by DoughBoy
As I read through all of the posts in this thread I have to sit and chuckle a bit. The introduction of the Nano is like the introduction of just about any other product out there. Be it new cars, motorcycles, games, and even with professional athletes, there will always be those who will prefer the old over the new.True to a point, but Apple takes the whole 3 steps forward, 2 steps backwards, 2 steps forward, 3 steps backward, cha cha cha to a spectator sport level.

[xboxman]

Buy a nano for £180...or buy a mini for under £100?:confused:


I was wondering about the headphone jack. I want to use a remote, it's easier then having to take the player out of my pocket and change track/ volume or turn it on/off.

[doughn]

it is the right time to upgrade, i just sold my a month old green mint scratchless ipod mini to my uncle with mini dock, leather case , earphone remote control, sennheiser mx400 cans.....

i can hear whispers in the night... NANO...NANO...NANO.....

its cooler&smaller

[letthereberock]

What did you get for it, doughn?