I’ve decided to get an iPod, as I’ve started a workout plan and would really like some music for when I’m working out. I’ve decided on an iPod of some sort, and I do plan on waiting until after Wednesday’s announcement to finalize a decision, but I’ve got a few questions.
Are the Nano’s TOO small? Do they seem too easy to break? I don’t have an Apple store within 3 hours, so I can’t just go look.
Is the weight difference for full-size iPods so much that they are much more unweildy when exercising?
Do you recommend an armband, or will the included belt clip suffice for running and such?
Any other comments about the differences between the two is very much appreciated.
I would refer you to this thread. There’s been a whole lot of publicity about how scratch-prone the Nano is. Honestly, I’d hold off on buying it for now, but if you don’t care about scratches, then the Nano is superior to “regular” iPods for exercising, but not so much because of size as because of the different construction. “Regular” iPods have a hard drive, which has moving parts, and as such are easier to break with the kind of jouncing that comes with exercise. The Nano has a flash drive, which by its very nature is much more unlikely to break because of being bounced around a bit. But as I said, my honest advice to you is not to buy a Nano right now because of the fairly widespread cosmetic problems people have been reporting.
Although my thread was meant to address larger issues with miniaturization, the Nano might be the perfect Exhibit A. I’ve fooled around with it in the store, and what I saw made me keep my money in my pocket. A flash-based iPod should be more robust than one with a hard drive; but the Nano ain’t that flash-based iPod. I’m pretty sure I could crumple it in my fist with a bit of effort. Don’t even get me started on the Shuffle.
Does anyone know whether the similarities in the UI between iPod and nano are more than skin deep? Specifically; can the nano be hacked to run Linux in the same way the regular iPods can?
These folks decided to test how much punishment the Nano could take. Despite scratching up badly and the screen quitting early on, the Nano kept on playing even after being run over by a car. YMMV, but it looks like the flash-based Nano can take a bit of punishment.
I know that this will be answered wednesday, but is the flash technology at a point at which, if there is a new generation of iPod released Wednesday, is it possible that there will be a full-size iPod with flash memory? I don’t know enough about the technology to speculate…
Do you have a Target near you? My local Target has Nanos nowadays.
I don’t think they’re too small at all. Sure, it’s small, but it doesn’t feel delicate.
I bought an armband to use with mine while I run, but if you have a pocket, that works equally well. In fact, it’s been cold in the morning, so I’ve been running with a hoodie on, and it’s easier using the hoodie pocket than the armband. But the armband looks cooler
If you get the opportunity to refil and recharge your iPod more than, say, once every three days then why not save your money and go for a Shuffle. Cheap, robust, and holds plenty of music - mine is the small one and it holds something like 8 hours of music at standard iTunes compression. I’ve never run the battery down so I’d guess something like 12 hours’ worth.
You can play the tunes in order you downloaded them or random, both are fun. Absolutely ideal for working out, I now walk to and from work everyday and this makes it a pleasure.
I thought about it, and I like a friend’s Shuffle, but I have enough trouble selecting songs for an 800GB CD-RW for the MP3 player/CD player in my car. If I were to go with a Nano, it would HAVE to be the 4GB one, as I would have to have anything on it that I could possibly want to listen to, and the rest of the songs from the albums that those songs are from.
Not at all, Keep jogging. People seem to forget two very important things:
ALL HD based iPods have 32 mb of cache. That means the HD spins up, loads half an hour of music then locks the heads making the device extremely resistant to damage. Why do you think every single apple ad show people jumpin’ and jivin’ around? Think they’d do that if there were the most remote chance they’d have a ton of warrantee repairs on their hands?
A .8 or 1.2 drive is much more resistant to shock based damage than the larger drives yu see in laptops and PeeCees. Smaller = less mass, less mass = less susceptibility to impact loads that cause damage.
Not to mention the fear mongering of folks saying stuff like ** ‘I’m pretty sure I could crumple it in my fist with a bit of effort. Don’t even get me started on the Shuffle.’** It makes for a great soundbyte, but it patently false.
Lastly - There’s a certain segment of the population that can destroy ANYTHING. I dunno why or how they can be so ignorant of how to take care of electronic things, but around them, no camera, cellphone, ipod, PSP, or laptop is safe.
Having been a killer gadget freak for 15 years or so, I’ve NEVER broken an LCD, crumpled a music player, or lost a hard drive due to impact.
The Nano scratches exactly the same way as the other ipods. The Face is made of the exact same polycarbonate that’s been used since the first iPod. Get a screen protector and move on. My two year old iPod looks the same as it did after the second day of ownership…scratched. But I didn’t buy it to lovingly polish and hold it up to the light. I bought it to put in my pocket and listen to damnear any song I could ever hope to carry with me. It’s done that exceptionally well.
We’ve been discussing this in my house because we’ve got an iPod photo and just bought a Nano. I am the clumsier of the two of us, so we’ve been discussing which is safer to make “mine.” The drive on the Nano may be heartier, but what about the screen, etc etc.
I have dropped my iPod Photo a half-dozen times, most of them on the carpet from about waist level, but once onto a concrete sidewalk. Still plays fine. Don’t know if this is miraculous, or sign of a general robustness of the iPod.
I don’t think it’s fear-mongering, nor is it obvious to me that it’s false. I’ve held an actual Nano and tried to flex it a little, and it does indeed feel as if it’s sufficiently thin and fragile that putting certain stresses on it could warp, snap, or crush it in real-world situations. The Shuffle is a little plastic stick. I could grab either end and easily snap it in two. I’ve had no such qualms about my iPod, nor did I have them about the Mini, because, quite simply, they’re designed differently. The need to have a greater depth dimension to accommodate the hard drive appears to make them less vulnerable to the kinds of damage I’m concerned about.
But the point is: It’s an expensive bit o’ kit and should be treated that way. Would you sit on a $200 pair of prescription sunglasses and consider them ill made?
If you mean a 20-GB iPod with fash memory (for example), I doubt it. Flash memory is still expensive. The difference between a 2GB and 4GB Nano is $150, and if you extrapolate it to 20GB it would be $1550.
I would certainly buy the $200 prescription sunglasses that were designed to withstand such abuse, over those that weren’t. Glasses are as much a fashion statement as a tool, so if one wants a fragile pair that look just fabulous, then they must exercise extra caution. I want a Nano for hiking, mtn bike riding, paintball, and I’m a bit of a klutz. I wouldn’t buy easily-breakable sunglasses for those activities. In fact, I’ve stopped buying expensive sunglasses altogether because I’ve lost or destroyed too many. I know lots of other people who also eschew the flashy stuff it it can’t take punishment, or if breaking something means losing a big investment. My fear about the Nano is not so much based on a idea that it’s flawed, but that it won’t be good for what I want to do with it, and hence won’t serve as an acceptable alternative to my iPod.
