do you like the stainless back?

[espanoliPod]

i just figured out how to post a poll, and the stainless back thread has been really popular, so cast your vote on what you think of the stainless back.

 

[paranoidxe]

Yes in the fact its very classy looking and if you get a invisible shield or something similar you should suffer from no scratching issues.

 

[Farid]

I think it's okay. I don't have any scratches on it, but it's a fingerprint magnet.

 

[tonyclifton]

yes i much prefer it, surface scratches dont even bother me, I like it looking used as long as the screen remains perfect.

 

[szemek]

I love the stainless back. It make it look stronger to me. In fact, the first scratch I got was not on the back, or the colored front, but the click wheel of all places!

Simon.

 

[applefreak]

My 2nd gen Nano has a Xtrememac microshield. To me it´s excellent because it covers everything, lets you dock and has a removable belt clip. If xtrememac get this I´ll get a Nano. All of my previous ipods the back cover was what scratched more easily than the front and being shiny, very noticeable!

 

[Code Monkey]

I've decried the stainless backs on iPods as toaster-chic from their origin.

And even if they were in theory classy, the fact that you must protect them to keep them so automatically invalidates such class as well as the opinion of anyone that holds them so. It's not class if it's, at best, sealed under plastic like grandma's furniture or, at worst, completely encased in opaque rubber/leather.

It's 2007, it's time Apple figured out how to make products that don't require hermetic sealing on day 0 of ownership to keep them from looking like any old p.o.s. metal trinket two weeks later.

 

[CuteLiLIvy55]

I feel like it is going to get scratched so easily.

 

[XDRoX]

I don't like it. I agree with Code Monkey and think apple should invent some type of material that not so easily scratched.
Oh wait, they already did!
I believe the only reason apple did assemble this nano like the 2 gen ones was so they could sell more next fall when they give them a solid metal case. Just like they did with the 2nd gen ones. Why else would they go back to a system that they knew consumers don't prefer. Don't they even advertise the 2 gen nanos with a solid metal casing as an advantage over the old ones.
Oh, BTW, I do think it looks more classy, but it's just not practical.

 

[andy2808]

hmm... mines got some surface scratches from the first two days when I couldn't find a makeshift case, but it's fine really... hardly noticeable unless you tilt it up to the light. Positives are that it looks cool.

 

[sUPERdUCKY]

I really like the look but would prefer it if they could find some way that to have the same look but scratch protected (without requiring to cover it)

 

[JazzyMac]

Love the look!

Also love the look of the paint on my car, so I make sure I wax it every now and then to keep it protected.

Odd analogy...as my car is pretty old and scratched up, but I'm sure my point's in there somewhere.

 

[Code Monkey]

Odd analogy...as my car is pretty old and scratched up, but I'm sure my point's in there somewhere.

Um, that old, crappy looking cars that no longer look show room fresh still run fine?

If/when I upgrade to the 3G nano my plan is just to go naked from day one and let the chips fall where they may regardless of how much I detest the chome. Mathematically, cases and such make little sense. I added up how much money I've spent on cases and films to "protect" my iPods; it comes over $200. This is for about $900 worth of iPods brand new. That's just silly

 

[Quillz]

Despite the fact its easily scratched, I happen to like the stainless steel rear casing. It not only makes the iPod unique, but it just makes the player look flat out beautiful.

 

[Wilder_K_Wight]

It's not there for cosmetic reasons...

The steel is stronger and more dent-resistant than the aluminum. If any of you have ever dropped a 2G nano onto a hard surface at an angle, you know what I mean. It dents really easily.

This would be very bad on a larger item with more internal parts than the 2G nano had. The 2G nano was pretty light, and very basic inside. The 3G is a bit more complex, and therefore needed the better dent-resistance of steel.

So the choice was basically dent resistant or scratch resistant, and I think Apple made the right decision this time, considering the size, weight, and components involved.

I think it looks OK, but I do miss the aluminum all over.

 

[nsx_23]

I absolutely hate that stainless back. Why can't they do a matte black finish instead for, say, the almost-black nanos since the silver clashes with the dark grey finish of the front face.

I refuse to use my 3G nano at the moment since I don't have a case, and I have this obsession about keeping things in almost-new condition

 

[ben7337]

It's not there for cosmetic reasons...

The steel is stronger and more dent-resistant than the aluminum. If any of you have ever dropped a 2G nano onto a hard surface at an angle, you know what I mean. It dents really easily.

This would be very bad on a larger item with more internal parts than the 2G nano had. The 2G nano was pretty light, and very basic inside. The 3G is a bit more complex, and therefore needed the better dent-resistance of steel.

So the choice was basically dent resistant or scratch resistant, and I think Apple made the right decision this time, considering the size, weight, and components involved.

I think it looks OK, but I do miss the aluminum all over.

would it be possible to use a steel base and have an anodized aluminum plating? and how would that work if it is possible? would removing a tiny bit of the steel to not increase thickness weaken it excessively? or on the nano would it be a bad thing to have en extra mm of thickness to better protect it?

 

[Code Monkey]

It's not there for cosmetic reasons...

Even if we assume this is true, your reasoning is utter bollocks, but that shouldn't be a surprise:

The steel is stronger and more dent-resistant than the aluminum. If any of you have ever dropped a 2G nano onto a hard surface at an angle, you know what I mean. It dents really easily.

Dropped minis, 2G nanos, & 5G iPods. The aluminum *does* dent really easily on the top and bottom edge but that's not so much the material as the design. My 5G has its share of dinks and if it had the same design as a mini or 2G nano, it wouldn't fare much better. The issue isn't the aluminum, it's the tube versus clamshell chassis design. Technically, you're right on this point, but you overstate its importance.

This would be very bad on a larger item with more internal parts than the 2G nano had. The 2G nano was pretty light, and very basic inside. The 3G is a bit more complex, and therefore needed the better dent-resistance of steel.

But here's where you enter crazy land:

Larger? Volume of the 8GB 2G nano is 1.46 cubic inches, volume of the 8GB 3G nano is 1.47 cubic inches - nope, not larger unless you regard 0.01 cubic inches as larger.

More internal parts? May I refer you to this and this. If anything, the new 3G nano is simpler, but that's pretty subjective for a device that's essentially a circuit board, LCD, battery, and clickwheel plus headphone jack and hold switch. At any rate, you are simply full of it suggesting there's more internal parts.

The 3G nano is much heavier? The weight of the 8GB 2G nano was 1.41 oz, the 8GB 3G nano is 1.74 oz That's about a 1/3 of an ounce difference (some of which comes from abandoning the all aluminum design) and the iPod mini with it's all aluminum chassis weighed in at 3.6 oz, more than twice either the 2G or 3G nano.

Plus, and here's the nail in your "logic", only half the nano is chrome plated steel; the other half is still that super flimsy aluminum. Better yet, it's the half that has the most fragile component, the LCD, that's the super flimsy aluminum. If the chrome steel was really brought back for protection reasons, we'd have chrome fronted iPods with colored aluminum backs, and since we don't, you don't have a case.

Technically, the steel probably is a bit more durable in the context of dents, but it was by no means mandated by the design of the nano based on comparison to past minis and nanos. Moreso, we know from past experience with the minis, 1G, and 2G nanos (the 1G was marginally larger and heavier than the 2G BTW) which design actually winds up the more vulnerable in real world usage.

Please, stop pretending your fanatical worship of all things Apple actually counts as reasoning and logic, they don't. One only need actually look at the specs of past generations of minis and nanos to see that your post is nothing but BS propoganda. I'd almost assume you were a paid shill for Apple, but I give them more credit than wanting you defending them so clumsily post after post.

 

[iPAY]

TBH, i really dont like the 3G nano in general. its too fat, and it takes away the "nano" appeal from it. im still using my 2G 8gb and i think its by far the best nano. i will just wait until i can buy myself an ipod touch 16gb babbeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

 

[espanoliPod]

too fat?!? have you actually seen one of the new nanos in person? it is a tad thinner than the 2g. sure, it is a bit wide, but fat? Noooooooo. no it is not.