-=- All I Wanted was a Black iPod Nano -=-

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Not it's not, it's a fashion accessory. You tell me how the Nano, able to hold about 300 songs maximum, is better than the original iPods that hold thousands upon thousands of songs? This being the original purpose, to carry around mass music.

Don't say "Video! Photos!" because that's what digital cameras are made for. Irrelevant features. Don't say size because the regular iPods aren't exactly big things that weigh you down. Clipped onto your belt you never know they are there.

-AC

in hardware we have the new battery (if i remember correctly)

in software we have an improved OS that can save battery life aswell as some new features

you tell me which IPOD is better, the very first one or the latest ones.

Features of the iPod Nano Vs The original iPod:

Holds up to 1,000 songs and full-colour album art.
...Vs the original iPods that hold THOUSANDS more songs (the point of the device, the reason it exists) and despite being bigger, are still small and more or less unnoticeable.

Only 9.0 x 4.0 x 0.69 cm and weighing just 42 g.
...Vs the original iPod which is wallet (or less) size and almost as light as a wallet once clipped onto a belt or slipped in pocket. Marketing ploys of the Nano apparantly suck people in.

Bright 3.81 cm colour LCD display.
...Vs the original iPod which DOESN'T have colour. Wow, I'm sure that will be a huge problem considering I'll only get it out to browse and click play. Then it goes back into the pocket or holster.

Up to 14 hours of battery life.
...Vs the original iPod which I have charged ONCE overnight and it's lasted me two days. I charge mine every night anyway.

Apple Click Wheel.
...Vs the original iPod...with the original click wheel (aka the same thing, no difference).

Charges and syncs via USB 2.0.
...Vs the original iPod which charges via a plug socket and syncs via USB. If it's got to the point where charging at a plug socket is trouble, I suggest help.

Accessory-compatible Dock connector.
...Vs the original iPod which comes with the only dock connector you need. The one to put albums onto it with.

Completely skip-free playback.
...Vs the original iPod which has this also.

Works with Mac OS X or Windows 2000/XP.
...Vs the original iPod which also has this.

Plays music, podcasts and audiobooks.
...Vs the original iPod which also plays music, holds MORE music and also plays podcasts. I would assume audiobooks but I doubt as many people are buying it got audiobooks as they are music.

Holds up to 25,000 photos.
...Vs the original iPod which only does what it is meant to do, created to do and designed to do...AS good and holds more.

Syncs contacts, calendars and to-do lists.
...Vs the original iPod which does almost all of the same and even if it didn't, it still does the MAIN feature, the reason it exists, better than the Nano.

So if we look at why the iPod exists (that being to hold as MUCH music as possible whilst being easy to travel with), we can see that the originals do it much better than the iPod Nano. If you don't have a lot of music, buy a smaller capacity. Don't shell out MORE money for a bunch of features that factually do not matter.

"Colour screen!" So? Do you walk along staring at it?

Buy an original iPod, Koala.

-AC

A.C, I'll get an original iPod.

Now where to find one for 50$ or less...

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Features of the iPod Nano Vs The original iPod:

Holds up to 1,000 songs and full-colour album art.
...Vs the original iPods that hold THOUSANDS more songs (the point of the device, the reason it exists) and despite being bigger, are still small and more or less unnoticeable.

Only 9.0 x 4.0 x 0.69 cm and weighing just 42 g.
...Vs the original iPod which is wallet (or less) size and almost as light as a wallet once clipped onto a belt or slipped in pocket. Marketing ploys of the Nano apparantly suck people in.

Bright 3.81 cm colour LCD display.
...Vs the original iPod which DOESN'T have colour. Wow, I'm sure that will be a huge problem considering I'll only get it out to browse and click play. Then it goes back into the pocket or holster.

Up to 14 hours of battery life.
...Vs the original iPod which I have charged ONCE overnight and it's lasted me two days. I charge mine every night anyway.

Apple Click Wheel.
...Vs the original iPod...with the original click wheel (aka the same thing, no difference).

Charges and syncs via USB 2.0.
...Vs the original iPod which charges via a plug socket and syncs via USB. If it's got to the point where charging at a plug socket is trouble, I suggest help.

Accessory-compatible Dock connector.
...Vs the original iPod which comes with the only dock connector you need. The one to put albums onto it with.

Completely skip-free playback.
...Vs the original iPod which has this also.

Works with Mac OS X or Windows 2000/XP.
...Vs the original iPod which also has this.

Plays music, podcasts and audiobooks.
...Vs the original iPod which also plays music, holds MORE music and also plays podcasts. I would assume audiobooks but I doubt as many people are buying it got audiobooks as they are music.

Holds up to 25,000 photos.
...Vs the original iPod which only does what it is meant to do, created to do and designed to do...AS good and holds more.

Syncs contacts, calendars and to-do lists.
...Vs the original iPod which does almost all of the same and even if it didn't, it still does the MAIN feature, the reason it exists, better than the Nano.

So if we look at why the iPod exists (that being to hold as MUCH music as possible whilst being easy to travel with), we can see that the originals do it much better than the iPod Nano. If you don't have a lot of music, buy a smaller capacity. Don't shell out MORE money for a bunch of features that factually do not matter.

"Colour screen!" So? Do you walk along staring at it?

Buy an original iPod, Koala.

-AC

lol... thanks for pointing out the known features which anyone can read up at APPLE.COM 😆

Originally posted by El_NINO
lol... thanks for pointing out the known features which anyone can read up at APPLE.COM 😆

Point? I didn't read it at apple.com actually, it was Amazon.co.uk. That was just for the iPod Nano. The rest is all common sense type by me.

The fact of the matter is, Nano sucks and it's for people who are more concerned about fashion than functionality. I just proved why the original iPods are better.

-AC

I have a 30GB black iPod! 😄

Loads better than the Nano! The vids aren't too shabby either! 😛

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Point? I didn't read it at apple.com actually, it was Amazon.co.uk. That was just for the iPod Nano. The rest is all common sense type by me.

The fact of the matter is, Nano sucks and it's for people who are more concerned about fashion than functionality. I just proved why the original iPods are better.

-AC

I never once thought about the fashion when i decided to purchase it, I purchased it because if what it can do. Do you really think people show off their IPODs hah I have yet to see someone flaunt an IPOD like there was no tomorrow.

I'm not KNOCKING the video features, I'm just saying don't buy it for that. You aren't realistically going to sit around while you're out, watching them. You're gonna be listening to music, and the Nano's suck for that.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm not KNOCKING the video features, I'm just saying don't buy it for that. You aren't realistically going to sit around while you're out, watching them. You're gonna be listening to music, and the Nano's suck for that.

-AC

All IPODs are the same in terms of music abilities, your not making sense. 😕

I want a nano becasue it is sooo small, and I did not need the 40 gbs or even 20 gb of the other ones.

Originally posted by El_NINO
All IPODs are the same in terms of music abilities, your not making sense. 😕

I am, you're not getting my point.

The iPod was created with a purpose, correct? That purpose was to be small, easy to travel with, but with the capacity to carry ENTIRE music libraries, Nano's do not do this. They carry, at MAXIMUM a thousand songs. That's with the 4GB Nano too, not an original iPod. You're paying for everything else BUT the musical capacity, which is the main point, which- in comparison with originals- is poor.

If you don't have much music, buy a smaller capacity iPod or even another MP3 player. Don't go shell out for a Nano when you're paying for everything except the thing that matters.

Originally posted by Koala MeatPie
I want a nano becasue it is sooo small, and I did not need the 40 gbs or even 20 gb of the other ones.

Why does size matter? The original iPods aren't hard or bothersome to carry around. If size is such an issue to the point that you are willing to settle for less functionality JUST to achieve smaller size, you might as well not carry anything around. If you want to carry an MP3 player around easily that does it's job the best, original iPods are the way to go. As I said, if you don't have much music then get a smaller iPod or a different MP3 player.

Nano's are pointless.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I am, you're not getting my point.

The iPod was created with a purpose, correct? That purpose was to be small, easy to travel with, but with the capacity to carry ENTIRE music libraries. Nano's do not do this, they carry, at MAXIMUM a thousand songs. That's with the 4GB Nano too, not an original iPod. You're paying for everything else BUT the musical capacity, which is the main point, which- in comparison with originals- is poor.

If you don't have much music, buy a smaller capacity iPod or even another MP3 player. Don't go shell out for a Nano when you're paying for everything except the thing that matters.

-AC

Oh ok now i see what you mean...

but your contradicting yourself. Thats the idea behind a 1GB to 4GB NANO, for people who dont want large space. So why would they go buy another MP3 player if they like IPODs and dont want a lot of space.

I did not want to have to buy an arband or belt clip, nor did I want a lump in my pockets, thats why.

Originally posted by El_NINO
Oh ok now i see what you mean...

but your contradicting yourself. Thats the idea behind a 1GB to 4GB NANO, for people who dont want large space. So why would they go buy another MP3 player if they like IPODs and dont want a lot of space.

I'm not contradicting myself, first of all.

Second, the question you THEN have to ask is: Why are you so intent on getting an expensive Nano? "It's small." So? As I previously said, if you're willing to subject yourself to HIGHER cost and lower functionality in conjunction with purpose, then why have anything? If original iPods are so big to carry around, then A) You're being silly and B) You obviously have a problem with carrying things in general.

The only reason people can justifiably argue for Nano's is for fashion purposes, in which case I laugh.

-AC

Why does size matter? The original iPods aren't hard or bothersome to carry around. If size is such an issue to the point that you are willing to settle for less functionality JUST to achieve smaller size, you might as well not carry anything around. If you want to carry an MP3 player around easily that does it's job the best, original iPods are the way to go. As I said, if you don't have much music then get a smaller iPod or a different MP3 player.

what are you talking about less functionality, as if people dont have options as to what they want.

If people want to watch videos and listen to music then get those kinds.

If people want to listen to music only then get those.

See your not making sense.

Originally posted by Koala MeatPie
I did not want to have to buy an arband or belt clip, nor did I want a lump in my pockets, thats why.

You don't buy the belt holster, it comes with it. Mine did.

Second, it's not a lump. Just because Apple are trying to convince you and spellbind you into buying things by making them stupidly and pointlessly small, it doesn't mean that the machines out previously were massive, cumbersome devices.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You don't buy the belt holster, it comes with it. Mine did.

Second, it's not a lump. Just because Apple are trying to convince you and spellbind you into buying things by making them stupidly and pointlessly small, it doesn't mean that the machines out previously were massive, cumbersome devices.

-AC

Why do you keep saying people see IPODs as big to carry?

I can get one for like 30 bucks from a friend of mine who's "friends" got them off the back of a truck if you will. But Im endlessly devoted to my mini and think the nano is a rip anyways.

Originally posted by El_NINO
Why do you keep saying people see IPODs as big to carry?

Read the post I replied to, thanks.

Originally posted by El_NINO
what are you talking about less functionality, as if people dont have options as to what they want.

If people want to watch videos and listen to music then get those kinds.

If people want to listen to music only then get those.

See your not making sense.

You're just not getting my point, so I shall repeat it a last time:

Koala says he wants a Nano because it's small and he doesn't want a lump in his pocket. Pointless. Why is it pointless? Because original iPods are not so big (or arguably even big at all) that they cause discomfort or even happen to be noticeable when you're out.

It's a clever marketing trick that everyone falls for. Apple keep making things smaller and people buy them because they feel that the older ones are now too big, when they've not grown or anything. People went made over the iPod shuffle because it was like a stick, despite it being the most pointless invention in music technology. When original iPods came out, everyone was like "Oh man, so easy! So good to travel with!" They're not magically harder or bigger just because there are SMALLER items designed to empty your pockets.

If Koala only wants and happens to be interested in- music, then the original iPods are more suitable.

No debate needed.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You don't buy the belt holster, it comes with it. Mine did.

Second, it's not a lump. Just because Apple are trying to convince you and spellbind you into buying things by making them stupidly and pointlessly small, it doesn't mean that the machines out previously were massive, cumbersome devices.

-AC

My wallet is smaller then 3rd gen iPod, Its still a lump.

When you are syanding in the Metro for an hour each day, packet in with hundreds of other people, stuck against the doors with your bag between your legs, people breathing down your neck, desperatly pressing your hands down onto the window to get any firction at all to stop you from tumbling each time it stops and goes, A lump is a lump.

Be it Cell, Wallet, Anything to minimize space is good.

but I am going for the Original iPod, 3rd gen thought.

ALOS when you run from One Metro level to another, lumps jump around and can fall out.

PLus to run and catch the bus, for me, it was for music + not annoying, slidding down the pants.