|
ipod nano stupid idea apple
|
|
|
johnodd4
Suspended permanently
|
9. September 2005 @ 01:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ok i have a simple question to ask who own's a color screen phone and if you do how long does your battery last if you ask your self this question you answered with the answer of i had to buy a extended battery because my phone eats battery life because of my color screen
now times that to a new ipod nano
first off to small easy to break easy to damage and battery life is going to suck do to the fact you have to run the color screen and the 4 gig hard drive in the ipod at the same time that means that every time you want to listen to a song your going to get through 2 albums and your battery will be dead color screens are battery consumers unless they added a 100+ hour battery the battery life is going to suck royal
you want my true opinon buy the 20 or 40 or even the ipod mini and forget about the nano it will take more battery power to run it then what it is worth
then here comes the bad news
remember all those accessories for the regular i pod the stereo dock and others like the cases even these accessories you happend to spend 100 apon 100 of dollers for
now will no longer fit due to the fact the ipod accessories fit the ipod mini and the regular ipod only so now with the nano because of it's small size it will not fit into the stereo docking station and other stereo receivers for the ipod so now your out of 100.00 + worth of accessories
and apple thinks the daily consumer will fork out 250 dollers for a ipod nano when they can get the same 4 gig's 1,000 songs on a ipod mini for only 200.00 wow 50.00 dollers for a color screen come on apple damn that is a rip off that brings the meaning of highway robbery to a new meaning
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
10. September 2005 @ 00:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yes they will! Since the Nano is a replacement for the Mini assecories will soon support the nano in full. I bet there are even adapters a person can use for older accesories! Do you relize how many shapes and sizes of iPodes there are? Those old 10 Gigs where huge. Why are you flipping out over the battery life? I'm sure the battery will last as long as its suppose too. LCD screens don't draw that much current. Its not a high-def screen and its not for watching movies. All the current iPods use similar LCD screens (even the Black and White ones). Also, why do you think the hard disk will drink to much jucie? Its smaller not larger. The micro drive has a shorter stoke and less seek time than the current drives. Thoes things alone will keep the battery nice and charged. I would get a new phone... j/k!
Where I do agree with you is the physical size of the nano. The first thing I though was, "Wow I think that thing would snap in twain if it was always in my pocket". They did compare it to a pencil... Anyone up for a game of "iPod Nano break"?
Ced
|
|
ricster
Member
|
13. September 2005 @ 03:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
Eh ? Doesn't the nano have flash memory ?
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
13. September 2005 @ 12:20 |
Link to this message
|
|
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. September 2005 @ 14:18
|
|
HT2791
Junior Member
|
13. September 2005 @ 16:26 |
Link to this message
|
"first off to small easy to break easy to damage"
^_^ this link proves it wrong.
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/nano.ars/3
they had to run over it with a car to stop it from playing. or something. besides.. dunt think apple would make it out of the fragile stuff
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
13. September 2005 @ 18:39 |
Link to this message
|
|
I never said it was, I just feel that the iPod Nano isn't very masculine and that the iPod Mini could kick its arse (j/k). I don't trust any manufactures even if there in the lime light. I liked the test they did though. The test where cool because they where real, not based on lots of usless numbers. I thought they where going to pop-a-cap into it for a sec.
Ced
|
|
johnodd4
Suspended permanently
|
14. September 2005 @ 00:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
interresting information allthough it still proved my point about how cheap it was if you could easyly break a lcd screen in the thing just by droping it
and also aftre watching apple's own presentation on the ipod nano it only had a 14-hour battery life when the ipod mini has a 40 hour battery life so don't tell me about how color screen's don't eat battery power my freind went out and purchased a ipod nano and tried it out for one day he made it though 2 albums then the stupid color screen would say battery low please recharge your ipod soon then shut off the next day my freind went and returned the ipod to the store where he bought it from and purchased a ipod mini he has had it on the single charge now for the past 4 days and it has barley takin any power out of the battery and he has been running the damn thing for 12 hours straight each of these days
so it still proves my point the ipod mini is better how many stupid people want to spend 199.99 for a 2 gig nano when for 199.99 you can get a ipod mini 4 gig 1000 songs where the nano 4 gig 1000 songs will cost you 250.00 + tax damn talk about stupid
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
14. September 2005 @ 04:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
So his two albums eualls 14 hours of music? There is no way that the iPod Mini boosted 40 hours. Thats a crap spec. I would try buying one for yourself a trying to give it a chance instead of being bias. I love my iPod. Its a 20 Gig. I don't have room for small capacities. So, I'm not in the market for iPod Nanos.
Lossless Encoding Rules!
Ced
|
|
bobarker
Newbie
|
16. September 2005 @ 19:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
First off: Why post something without checking to make sure that it's true.
The 40 hr battery life you mentioned for the iPod mini is completely bogus. Apple itself says that the iPod mini only has a battery life of 18 hrs, less than half of what you claim. Don't believe me? Do a google search for "iPod Mini" and check Google's cache of the website (it is no longer hosted on apple's servers as they no longer make the product...this leads into my second point later on). So essentially for the color display, you're only forfeiting 4 hours of batterly rather than the 22 you claim.
My second point is that they no longer make the mini; the nano was made to replace it, so even if you wanted to get it, you couldn't.
My third point is that you claim that it is easy to break the nano by merely dropping it. The linked website stated that they dropped it from a height of NINE feet after running over it with a car and performing other tests on it. Now how careless of a user can a person be to drop his iPod from a tall height like that? But just for your sake, i'll pretend that the user dropped it down a flight of stairs. Now, the iPod broke after those guys did those other tests, right? So is there no way that the ipod coudlve suffered some damage that a person could not see through a simple glance? Now I understand that this last argument involves a bit of conjecture, but it nonetheless has some valid points.
Finally, I will admit to you this. I am a 20 gb iPod user. I use a 20 gig ipod because not only was the ipod not availible but also because i thought that for the larger amount of space i got, it was worth forking over extra money. But that still does not mean i dont like the nano. Heck, i think it's the coolest apple product out now. It's so thin and looks cool as hell.
But anyways...there's my rant.
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
17. September 2005 @ 07:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well writtin. I feel the same way. I wouldn't part with my 20 Gig because of the nano. But I don't think people that are willing to buy a 20+ gig are buying for the same resons as a mini/nano (or shuffle) buyer.
You know how I know the iPod Nano is great? During this entire thread no one suggested going for a Zen or any other iPod alternatives. The only argument against the Nano campared it to its ancestor. If the only thing that campares to an iPod is another iPod then this product must truly be in a league of its own.
Ced
|
|
ardvark23
Newbie
|
18. September 2005 @ 13:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
meh I agree, they should focus on making the ipod last longer than 18 months rather than come out with this, oh well, I'll stick to my flash drive mp3 player.
Does anyone here really still use itunes? I couldn't get the hang of it so I use rhapsody25, a lot better imo
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
18. September 2005 @ 16:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
rapsody? Well whatever works for you. iTunes is as slick as silk. I hate napster though.
18 months? You mean the battery?
Ced
|
|
boarder83
Newbie
|
22. September 2005 @ 15:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
I bought a ipod mini 4g and i literally yelled "f*ck!!!" when i saw that if i had waited 3 months b4 buying it i could have spent the easy $50 and got photo storage, a color screen and the coolest looking peice of technology out on the market, amongst other things.
I would sell my mini but its battery life already has problems from canstantly recharging it and i would get only 100-150 dollars tops if i sold it on ebay.
So its great that apple is coming out with all this cool-ass technology but it kind-of puts everyone - with the mini wishing they waited and pushed the extra $50 - in a bad mood.(or maybe just me) If only there was a way to exchange the old for new.
|
|
boarder83
Newbie
|
22. September 2005 @ 15:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
O yeah, and the battery on the mini lasts way the hell longer than 18 months unless you could go thru 300-500 full charge cycles in that amount of time.
And screw iTunes $1 a song! how about using rhapsody, napster or downloading music for free from lime-wire or bear-share
|
Moderator
|
24. September 2005 @ 11:23 |
Link to this message
|
|
you cannot put rhapsody/napster songs on the ipod, i don't think.
|
|
boarder83
Newbie
|
28. September 2005 @ 15:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
im pretty sure u can but not 100% idk y u wouldnt be able to. I know u can use them for other mp3 players.
|
Moderator
|
29. September 2005 @ 01:30 |
Link to this message
|
|
because the ipod has a limited range of compatible types, and the rhapsody/napster/walmart all have different types (which have allsorts of copyrights on them).
im at work at the momemt, but i think ipod can only play
apple audio (lossless/protected/whatever..)
.mp3
.m4a
.ogg
i think
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 29. September 2005 @ 01:31
|
|
Glitched
Suspended permanently
|
29. September 2005 @ 11:03 |
Link to this message
|
|
ipod has there own format like .ipod or something,if not they should make 1 that is better and clearer than mp3
Sig Created Phantom69 |
|
Glitched
Suspended permanently
|
29. September 2005 @ 11:03 |
Link to this message
|
|
ipod has there own format like .ipod or something,if not they should make 1 that is better and clearer than mp3
Sig Created Phantom69
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. September 2005 @ 11:48 |
Link to this message
|
|
Apple do have their own format which is AAC/MP4.
|
|
Glitched
Suspended permanently
|
29. September 2005 @ 12:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
ohh thx for the info weazel200, so do you think its better than .mp3
Sig Created Phantom69
|
|
v1225
Suspended permanently
|
1. October 2005 @ 09:18 |
Link to this message
|
|
what's the matter with u all, ipod nano is good,2gb(500 songs)plus colour screen(photos),i've got my own one and it's great,it's got 10hrs play time and 25,000 photos, anyway if your stupid enough to drop it then i think u deserve to have it smashed.
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
1. October 2005 @ 11:36 |
Link to this message
|
@ Glitched,
Yes Mp4 (.m4a/MPEG4-AAC/aacPlus) is better than Mp3 (LAME).
Protected files bought on iTunes files are labled with a .m4p extension. Non-protected files produced by iTunes and other Mp4 audio encoders produce files labled with the .m4a extension. Both file types are MPEG-4 AAC at the core. Some are also aacPlus files. aacPlus files are MPEG-4 AAC files that are optimized for low-bitrates.
@ v1225,
Its nice to here from a proud owner!
Ced
|
Senior Member
|
2. October 2005 @ 04:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ipod nano is harder to break cause it's made out of flash memory. Ipod would break much eaiser cause of hardrive.
Does anyone have a link that test ipod?
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
v1225
Suspended permanently
|
2. October 2005 @ 05:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
i would like to take bake my statement,ipod nano is rubbish because of it's battery life,unlike the iriver h10,after one year ipod nano's battery life starts to fail so you've got to start thinking about getting a new ipod nano,and the ipod nano doesn't have a removerble battery like the rio carbon or the iriver h10,and it might be light weight but the ipod nano's screen will brake after 1 drop on the floor,so u coudnt look at your photos,but u could still listen to your music for the rest of the year.
|
