iPod nano 3G first hands-on

Ok, we know we've been calling it the fatty, but we'll be straight up with you guys: the third gen iPod nano is friggin' tiny. It's maybe not the most beautifully proportioned iPod we've ever seen, but its tapered edges and ridiculously thin frame make up for the squatness going on here.

Gallery: iPod nano 3G first hands-on

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

[NOTASOCCERSTAR09 @ Sep 5th 2007 2:48PM]

eww that looks like crap

[Outinthedark @ Sep 5th 2007 2:49PM]

Agreed...!

[anonymouspimp @ Sep 5th 2007 2:53PM]

Why don't we just change the site to www.iGadget.com?

JK. But seriously... i realize that all this Apple news is, well, big news... but maybe consolidate some of these threads! the last un-apple related thread is about to fall off onto page 2! lol

[Alan Partridge @ Sep 5th 2007 3:01PM]

lmao at Ryan's damage limitation "but its tapered edges and ridiculously thin frame make up for the squatness going on here" Would he do that for anyone else :D

[Matt Blatz @ Sep 5th 2007 7:37PM]

Store is up!

[Vizion @ Sep 5th 2007 3:22PM]

Creative's ZEN still beats this in my opinion.

[dj-kenpo @ Sep 5th 2007 3:58PM]

they should have just put a taller screen on the old nano shape. then you could just flip the thing sideways when you need to view widscreen stuff. when used tall, you'd also have more screen space for song titles, as well as keeping the original form factor.

hey steve, you should have hired ME!

[dawhiz @ Sep 5th 2007 4:25PM]

The new iPod nano is kind of like the fat kid...

[enzo @ Sep 5th 2007 4:31PM]

I still think it looks like Apple is keepin' it real fake... with their own products

[nomad1984 @ Sep 5th 2007 7:44PM]

I agree with dj-kenpo, the new nano would of looked better on the side..
here is a mock of it...
http://tinyurl.com/3d4fml

but if it was on its side... what would the left handed person do?

[Yves @ Sep 5th 2007 2:50PM]

Dude...

[ftf @ Sep 5th 2007 2:48PM]

Step backwards from the old nano. Booo.

[Alan Partridge @ Sep 5th 2007 2:48PM]

Man thats ugly! I feel like poking my own eyes out!

[Chris @ Sep 5th 2007 3:57PM]

I depends on where you look at this, in my opinion. I love the nano, the size & horsepower, Now it comes with video, how bad is that, now don't get me wrong the "iPod Classic" kills me, but the "Phatty" is in my eyes. The Power of the iPod 5th Gen in the body of a nano. I Like It.

[Alan Partridge @ Sep 5th 2007 4:14PM]

horsepower? Preliminary reviews suggest its sluggish as hell, and that's before you start you using coverflow!

[Napalmtrees @ Sep 5th 2007 2:49PM]

I don't know, I suppose I could get behind that. I just wish the prices would go down farther.

[Ben @ Sep 5th 2007 2:49PM]

it might look better if the whole front of that thing was a screen with no scroll wheel.

[NOTASOCCERSTAR09 @ Sep 5th 2007 2:49PM]

sorry im just saying i was the first post for once

[Nick @ Sep 5th 2007 3:28PM]

Why?

[Luke Thomas @ Sep 5th 2007 2:49PM]

Wow, Engadget is swift with their coverage. I went to the bathroom and I came back to find the iPod touch already covered.

[PDubNYC @ Sep 5th 2007 3:12PM]

Damn, what'd you eat? It too a while for Steve to get around to the iPod Touch

[Eric M @ Sep 5th 2007 2:49PM]

Does everything really have to have a little TV on it? This is why American are so fat. Do we really have to be entertained everywhere we go??

[Mr. Picklesworth @ Sep 5th 2007 3:34PM]

I think what you mean is "do we really have to be entertained by the same thing everywhere?"

Personally, I have never owned a portable music player and do not intend to. A multi-function device is nice to carry around on a long / boring / noisy plane ride, but if I am going for a walk or the like, I see absolutely no reason to shut myself off from the outside world.
Movies and music are both fun, but they are not the only kind of fun.
There is enjoyable ambiance everywhere; not just in your MP3 player. (The sound quality is great, too).

[Alan Partridge @ Sep 5th 2007 2:49PM]

Will be interesting to compare it to your first hand on with the new ZEN
http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/31/hands-on-with-creatives-zen/

[stillen @ Sep 5th 2007 2:52PM]

I may be the only one here so far that thinks this doesn't look that bad, but I will agree that the ZEN will give the nano a run for a it's money. My vote right now is for the ZEN, but nice try apple...

[Jack @ Sep 5th 2007 2:49PM]

darn it beaten by apple fanboys :(
no the 1st to comment

[Outinthedark @ Sep 5th 2007 2:50PM]

What a waste of a lunch break...

[Nick S @ Sep 5th 2007 2:56PM]

Looks ugly but I guess they needed it to be wider to accomodate the screen.

[Jordank @ Sep 5th 2007 2:53PM]

gayness
makes me wanna play minesweeper

[zachary miller @ Sep 5th 2007 2:57PM]

One word: VIDEO

[jamma @ Sep 5th 2007 3:02PM]

One word: WHY??

the screen is smaller than my phone', and that's crap for video.

Is this(and the others) compatible with the universal docks???

[Chris @ Sep 5th 2007 4:08PM]

Hell Yes.

[Van Daniel @ Sep 6th 2007 12:53AM]

The screen is also vastly denser than your cell phone.

[DJBro @ Sep 5th 2007 2:54PM]

did they have to use the chrome back... thats what i liked about the 2nd gen, it was brushed aluminum so it wouldnt get scratched or fingerprinted up.

[Alan Partridge @ Sep 5th 2007 4:23PM]

Haven't they done that deliberately to drive up accessory sales? Chrome back = more skins sales, No radio = more radio attachement sales etc. Those sales then convince manufacturers to build more accessories. Consumers then see a certain product has lots of accessories so leans towards buying that product and the aforementioned extras.

[Van Daniel @ Sep 6th 2007 12:50AM]

Not everything is a conspiracy.

[Sam @ Sep 5th 2007 2:56PM]

5.3 gb used space plus 2 gb free equals only 7.3 gb available space...way to go jobs?

[dude @ Sep 5th 2007 2:56PM]

great! Now I'll buy one!

[Ethan Duffy @ Sep 5th 2007 2:56PM]

If Ryan is reading this, I'd be interested to hear more about what you said earlier concerning cover flow. How sluggish/choppy is it and is it enough of a detraction to make it less of a viable alternative to the text browser?

I think ergonomically it's a tad worse than the g2 model, but it's more functional and better value.

[Anthony N @ Sep 5th 2007 3:00PM]

I wonder what they're going to to about the nike running chips?

[Chris @ Sep 5th 2007 3:02PM]

Yeah, which new iPods will work with it? The Touch is flash based, so maybe it will be Nike compatible as well.

[Outinthedark @ Sep 5th 2007 3:08PM]

That will be fun to run around with...the swinging cables annoy me enough.

But good question which if any will be compatible...? I'd love to see the graph charts given on nike.com on the new nano

[Chris @ Sep 5th 2007 3:23PM]

Just looked on the Nike+iPod gear page on Apple.com, and it shows the new fatty nano. Doesnt say anything about the Touch, so I guess its still a nano thing. Thats weird, I thought they didnt make this compatible with the regular iPod because of the spinning hdd. Oh well, Im gonna grab a 2G nano now that they are cheaper and use that. I dont need to (read: can't) watch video while running anyways.

[primetime4 @ Sep 5th 2007 3:01PM]

If that thing gets any thinner, they are going to have to widen it just for the headphone jack.

[Jin Kam @ Sep 5th 2007 3:01PM]

The new iPod line up is a dud. I am so freakin' disappointed.

Read my rant at:

http://digg.com/apple/The_new_iPod_line_up_is_a_dud

[Adam @ Sep 5th 2007 3:22PM]

I buried your Digg post.

[Welly @ Sep 6th 2007 9:10AM]

I also buried your Digg post.

[mewantphone @ Sep 5th 2007 3:01PM]

Jim walked down the street with a "fatty" in his pants. lol.

[Phil Gino @ Sep 5th 2007 3:02PM]

Ugly. The scroll wheel has run it's course. No thanks.

Maybe a Samsung player for me this year, Bluetooth 2.0 support will be nice.

[Josh @ Sep 5th 2007 3:14PM]

Looks a bit ugly, but I don't want to judge until I get my hands on one.