Cool, iPod nano

Open discussion about any topic, as long as you abide by the rules of course!
shiznit
Posts: 1244
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2005 4:39 pm

Post by shiznit »

Geebs wrote:"floating" as in, 80% of the market? When nerds won't buy apple because of nerdly prejudice?

Nah, couldn't just be well designed and do a good job. That'd be too obvious.
Apple had a 92% market share at one point, but many people are starting to choose cheaper flash memory-based players. Plus the competition is steping up with products that have better features.
Tormentius
Posts: 4108
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2002 8:00 am

Post by Tormentius »

shiznit wrote:
Apple had a 92% market share at one point, but many people are starting to choose cheaper flash memory-based players. Plus the competition is steping up with products that have better features.
I'd say at 80% of the market they aren't in danger of losing the overwhelming majority anytime soon. Besides, its anti-everything nerds that are usually so desperate to look for alternative (and usually inferior) products. The obvious majority of people who are looking for an MP3 player enjoy the mix of an intuitive interface, usfeful features, and aesthetics that Apple's product line offers.

Most of their competition have clunky interfaces, require shit software, require batteries, or have some other major drawback.
[xeno]Julios
Posts: 6216
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am

Post by [xeno]Julios »

Turbanator wrote:jesus, playing with the nano's this morning, amazing product, so small it seems so delicate... definately buying a 4gb black... *adds to existing ipod collection*
you mean thin. According to the dimensions i posted, it's really not that much smaller than a regular ipod

half as thick is the main thing from what i can tell.
shiznit
Posts: 1244
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2005 4:39 pm

Post by shiznit »

Tormentius wrote:
shiznit wrote:
Apple had a 92% market share at one point, but many people are starting to choose cheaper flash memory-based players. Plus the competition is steping up with products that have better features.
I'd say at 80% of the market they aren't in danger of losing the overwhelming majority anytime soon. Besides, its anti-everything nerds that are usually so desperate to look for alternative (and usually inferior) products. The obvious majority of people who are looking for an MP3 player enjoy the mix of an intuitive interface, usfeful features, and aesthetics that Apple's product line offers.

Most of their competition have clunky interfaces, require shit software, require batteries, or have some other major drawback.

I believe you are correct, ipod will continue to thrive for a while unless something revolutionary comes a long. I'm not anti-ipod. I just don't really get excited when apple releases new ipods, because they are ussually a bit smaller, have less space and more colors.
hate
Posts: 1846
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 8:00 am

Post by hate »

a second hand dirty player with someone elses music on it.
gtfo
User avatar
Foo
Posts: 13840
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2000 7:00 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by Foo »

Hey I wouldn't have minded if it had been a mistake, but when I rang up it turns out that's their policy.
"Maybe you have some bird ideas. Maybe that’s the best you can do."
― Terry A. Davis
Dave
Posts: 6986
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Dave »

[xeno]Julios wrote:
Turbanator wrote:jesus, playing with the nano's this morning, amazing product, so small it seems so delicate... definately buying a 4gb black... *adds to existing ipod collection*
you mean thin. According to the dimensions i posted, it's really not that much smaller than a regular ipod

half as thick is the main thing from what i can tell.
You'd be surprised how much difference 'half as thick' makes at those sizes. The mini was only, at most, an inch smaller here and there, but it made a world of difference in terms of feel
shiznit
Posts: 1244
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2005 4:39 pm

Post by shiznit »

It appears much thinner.

Image
Image
Image
saturn
Posts: 4334
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2000 8:00 am
Location: The Netherlands

Post by saturn »

[xeno]Julios wrote:
Eraser wrote:
[xeno]Julios wrote: Not really that much smaller. It's about half as thick as my regular ipod, and not significantly smaller along the other dimensions.


Ipod nano:

3.5 x 1.6 x 0.27

Old ipod:

4.1 x 2.4 x 0.63

hardly worthy of being called nano...

Looks like they've gotten rid of the mini ipod.
The iPod mini was significantly smaller than the regular ipod. This nano is even smaller than the mini.
But it seems that the mini is completely gone, as 6Gb is a rather nice amount of space.
But that would mean that the nano is significantly smaller than the regular ipod and then some.

But the measurements I've posted indicate otherwise.

[xeno]Julios wrote:um- can anyone tell me why the nano is so cool? It's not that much smaller than the regular ipod.

[xeno]Julios wrote:
shiznit wrote:Because it's another overhyped and obsolete product from apple and this time it's a few mm smaller.
good to know i'm not alone

[xeno]Julios wrote:
Turbanator wrote:jesus, playing with the nano's this morning, amazing product, so small it seems so delicate... definately buying a 4gb black... *adds to existing ipod collection*
you mean thin. According to the dimensions i posted, it's really not that much smaller than a regular ipod

half as thick is the main thing from what i can tell.
WTF is wrong with you. The only thing you can post that you think it isn't that much smaller than a normal iPod while it's incredibly obvious that it is.

What is your point anyway, it's a new model, it's smaller, it's cool, it replaces the Mini, it's called iPod nano. That's all.
hate
Posts: 1846
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 8:00 am

Post by hate »

confuscious confused
User avatar
plained
Posts: 16366
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2002 7:00 am

Post by plained »

all this over a tune player?

i seen a similar very small microdrive player with mirror back and everything at staples months ago
it is about time!
[xeno]Julios
Posts: 6216
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am

Post by [xeno]Julios »

saturn wrote:WTF is wrong with you. The only thing you can post that you think it isn't that much smaller than a normal iPod while it's incredibly obvious that it is.

What is your point anyway, it's a new model, it's smaller, it's cool, it replaces the Mini, it's called iPod nano. That's all.
i posted the dimensions of the ipod vs. the nano -

Ipod nano:

3.5 x 1.6 x 0.27

Old ipod:

4.1 x 2.4 x 0.63

and the nano only holds 2-4gb.

yet it's 200 dollars (compared to 300 dollars for regular)

something just seems very wrong here.

I was just looking for someone to respond to this concern, and nobody did until Dave on the third page:
You'd be surprised how much difference 'half as thick' makes at those sizes. The mini was only, at most, an inch smaller here and there, but it made a world of difference in terms of feel
SplishSplash
Posts: 4467
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:00 am

Post by SplishSplash »

DON'T FUCKING BUY IT IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT.
[xeno]Julios
Posts: 6216
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am

Post by [xeno]Julios »

SplishSplash wrote:DON'T FUCKING BUY IT IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT.
:icon27:
+JuggerNaut+
Posts: 22175
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:00 am

Post by +JuggerNaut+ »

[xeno]Julios wrote: and the nano only holds 2-4gb.

yet it's 200 dollars (compared to 300 dollars for regular)
the now "defunct" mini was 4GB and was $250 US. were you griping about it as well?
saturn
Posts: 4334
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2000 8:00 am
Location: The Netherlands

Post by saturn »

[xeno]Julios wrote:
saturn wrote:WTF is wrong with you. The only thing you can post that you think it isn't that much smaller than a normal iPod while it's incredibly obvious that it is.

What is your point anyway, it's a new model, it's smaller, it's cool, it replaces the Mini, it's called iPod nano. That's all.
i posted the dimensions of the ipod vs. the nano -

Ipod nano:

3.5 x 1.6 x 0.27

Old ipod:

4.1 x 2.4 x 0.63

and the nano only holds 2-4gb.

yet it's 200 dollars (compared to 300 dollars for regular)

something just seems very wrong here.

I was just looking for someone to respond to this concern, and nobody did until Dave on the third page:
You'd be surprised how much difference 'half as thick' makes at those sizes. The mini was only, at most, an inch smaller here and there, but it made a world of difference in terms of feel

you should go to the store and hold in in your hand, you'll feel how small it is. It's expensive cause it contains flash memory. It's like 45 dollars for 1 gb i think, so if you take the 4 gb nano, it's even fairly cheap with all the components and the good build. Of course Samsung gave Apple a good discount for buying their whole stock of flash mem.
saturn
Posts: 4334
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2000 8:00 am
Location: The Netherlands

Post by saturn »

+JuggerNaut+ wrote:
[xeno]Julios wrote: and the nano only holds 2-4gb.

yet it's 200 dollars (compared to 300 dollars for regular)
the now "defunct" mini was 4GB and was $250 US. were you griping about it as well?
$279 euros here for 4 gb, that's why I paid 30 euros more and got the 20 gb 4G :>
mjrpes
Posts: 4980
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2000 8:00 am

Post by mjrpes »

I'd buy it, but my 1G iPod is still holding out.
[size=85]yea i've too been kind of thinking about maybe a new sig but sort of haven't come to quite a decision yet[/size]
saturn
Posts: 4334
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2000 8:00 am
Location: The Netherlands

Post by saturn »

1G iPod, wow, must feel like a brick now :>
mjrpes
Posts: 4980
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2000 8:00 am

Post by mjrpes »

It's still quite portable, but the battery can't hold a charge for more than a day <:B
[size=85]yea i've too been kind of thinking about maybe a new sig but sort of haven't come to quite a decision yet[/size]
saturn
Posts: 4334
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2000 8:00 am
Location: The Netherlands

Post by saturn »

yeah, but you are hardcore 1st gen.
Turbanator
Posts: 883
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 1983 7:00 am

Post by Turbanator »

i doubt any geek here would not be impressed by this product once they hold and feel one. and then when it turns on infront of your eyes, with a full color screen.... it's quite fucking cool...
Iccy (temp)
Posts: 412
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 1:32 am

Post by Iccy (temp) »

Well something to point out that important i feel. Its solid state. no moving parts at all. Thats such a huge increase in life span for it, not to mention the size and the " fair " pricing. Im thinking of getting one, but i really need more then 4gb. Gimme a 20 gb nano and hells yea.
" I thought i could handle the power, Ive alway been a kind and gentle person.

But once i was finaly able to split the atom
i built me some bombs and droped them on every mother fucker that got in my way."
+JuggerNaut+
Posts: 22175
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:00 am

Post by +JuggerNaut+ »

4gb is quite a bit of music
shiznit
Posts: 1244
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2005 4:39 pm

Post by shiznit »

+JuggerNaut+ wrote:4gb is quite a bit of music
Most mp3s are between 4-6mb if not less, so it's like 1000 songs?
Post Reply