3G iPod nano review roundup

Well, that was fast -- just two days after Steve pulled one out of his pocket, reviews of the newest iPod nano are filtering in, and they seem to be overwhelmingly positive. Everyone seems to be digging the fatty's battery life, price, and diminutive size, but the overall proportions dictated by the 2-inch screen drew some complaints. That screen also received praise for its clarity and sharpness, but watching video on such a small device seems to invite some awkward neck angles -- shocking, we know. Overall, however, it looks like Apple's got another hit on its hands -- fatty pride, y'all.

Read - PC Mag
Read - CNET
Read - ZDNet Australia
Read - iLounge

[Patrick @ Sep 8th 2007 6:57AM]

I just saw some dude on the street about 2 hours ago with one. I have to admit there not bad looking in the wild, well not as bad as those first leaked photos seemed to make them out to be. Im still holding out for the Touch personally though.

[sp @ Sep 8th 2007 8:42AM]

the awkward angles can be easily fixed by sweating a lot so your neck is well-lubricated. and then you can use the torrents too because torrents are for sweaty people.

[txen @ Sep 8th 2007 12:10PM]

what's a touch ipod for anyways? The big boom on touch screen tech came with multi touch capabilities.... name 3 actions involving two different fingers on screen... besides zooming in 3 different photos!

Personally i don't get it with the iTouch.... it just needs time to evolve


What are the the unique actions a multi touch screen does that a regular touch screen doesn't do? iphone and such could've been around much earlier, my thought.

[jg @ Sep 8th 2007 11:27PM]

Ya, maybe I'm crazy, but of all the announcements from apple, the 160GB classic got me the most excited. Even though the touch has every feature everyone wanted it to have (web browser, wifi music store), I still kinda feel like it was a let down. Dunno, maybe I'm just crazy.

[Sherry Haney @ Oct 10th 2007 1:24PM]

I have a new 4gb iPod Nano and am not happy with it at all. It constantly locks up and has to be reset. When I called Apple, it took an hour for them to tell me they really couldn't do anything about it and that it was because the pictures that were uploaded to the iPod came from my external hard drive. HUH? So, I am stuck with $150 piece of Apple Trash.

[Jonto81 @ Sep 8th 2007 6:59AM]

Sorry but did endgadet not rubbish a picture of this design at the start of the week saying it was paintshopped? I will try and find a link and post it

[Pans @ Sep 8th 2007 7:46AM]

Yes they did.

But you have to realize that Engadget isn't going to disparage a real Apple product and risk losing that apparently important fanboy viewership that they and Gizmodo are fighting over.

And how do you do that? Praise EVERYTHING from Apple.

It's pretty obvious that they are talking up something they HATED just a week ago.

[Alan Partridge @ Sep 8th 2007 10:09AM]

I think you might be talking about this post
http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/22/apples-3rd-generation-ipod-nano-revealed-in-spy-shots/

Some of the comments are quite interesting

"I have a hard time believing Apple would release a product so aesthetically unpleasant."

"These would be the ugliest products Apple's put out since the first gen iMacs. This is total BS."

"There is nothing Apple-like about those pics. Complete BS."

[Alan Partridge @ Sep 8th 2007 7:01AM]

You gotta feel for Creative, their new ZEN has more features, better codec support, better screen, expandable memory, better sound quality and, in my opinion, a much nicer design yet they get completely ignored over that monstrosity pictured above.

[Mrmean @ Sep 8th 2007 7:18AM]

uh huh, sure thing Alan......

[BEE Bopp @ Sep 8th 2007 4:55PM]

Alen, Not completely ignored. I have been following the Zen and waited for this new Nano to be released. Now that I can compare both, I will be getting the Zen. I am sure there are many others that will independently decide. Both look like great products and it is a HARD choice!!!

[Stupidiot @ Sep 8th 2007 7:31AM]

Not to mention cheaper than the nano. I was thinking of getting the new Zen, since I'm looking for a flash player to replace my clunky, slow hard disk based Vision: M (it's still better than the 5G iPods by far, with a better UI and more features, I just don't like HDD based PMPs), but now I'm leaning more towards the iPod touch, though not until it drops in price. No way am I spending £270 on a 16GB PMP, even if it does have tons of flashy features. Christmas can't be too far off right? ;)

[devurandom @ Sep 8th 2007 7:33AM]

How much does Creative pay you, really?

[Matt @ Sep 8th 2007 7:35AM]

But you can't use iTunes with it, and iTunes is half of iPod. Anyway, I doubt the firmware is anywhere near as good, and the Zen you are referring to is bulkier, but has the same screen resolution.

[Dustin Frazier @ Sep 8th 2007 7:52AM]

I wish Creative would start paying people to advertise their players. FFS Creative, why the hell do you make such badassed Daps and then not advertise them? How much is Apple paying Creative to NOT advertise?


Same goes for you Archos.

[shaliron @ Sep 8th 2007 8:25AM]

But then again, the iPod has smashing battery life, a more durable design (with the metal instead of fingerprint inducing glossy plastic), and is smaller and thinner. And the price is also very competetive for the target market.

Features vs. Overall Package really.

[Alan Partridge @ Sep 8th 2007 8:48AM]

"has the same screen resolution"

Same resolution but 16million colours for the ZEN compared to 262k for the iPod

"the iPod has smashing battery life, a more durable design, and is smaller and thinner"

The ZEN, according to the spec sheets, has a better battery life. Let's wait and see how many Nano screens start cracking before talking about durability and i think the ZEN is smaller although not thinner.

Read the CNET of the new ZEN, "but the maximum onboard storage capacity of 16GB is rather limiting for a PMP, especially if one is planning to store mainly video files." Do they crticise the Nano for only having 8GB? Nah, they just tell us that it's a "must-have for the holidays".

The lack of features caused CNET trouble to find something to talk about, infact in their six-paragraph 'first take' review on the new Nano they dedicate the longest paragraph to talk about how you can now access the shuffle feature from the 'Now Playing' pane. Great!

[craig @ Sep 8th 2007 9:04AM]

Good thing Apple would never use anything as cheap as fingerprint-inducing, glossy plastic, eh shaliron?

[Dale @ Sep 8th 2007 9:53AM]

I'd use a Creative player if they supported Mac better. I have to use an app coded by someone in their bedroom to maintain my old Zen Jukebox Xtra - it was one of the reasons I opted for a Nano, that and the damn thing skipping when I dared walk with it in my pocket.

[Constable Odo @ Sep 8th 2007 9:55AM]

Even though I'm an iPod 5G user, looking at the Zen Vision W I would have to say it would be more practical than an iPod Touch for viewing movies since there is support for many codecs and has far better capacity. Whether the Zen is equal in quality to the iPod or the interface works as well I do not know. But if it works as advertised the Zen Vision W would be a better choice for me. And I wouldn't doubt if there are other players as good if not better than comparable iPods. But as you know, Apple has marketing clout and that's enough to keep it in the forefront and most other players out of the running. It's up to people to look around and try other products that are suitable for them.

[Bobs @ Sep 8th 2007 10:00AM]

I dont want Archos advertising, I like being the only one in my whole city with a powerful media tank. As for creative, the audio quality rocks, even on the older players, but they have been doing sound cards for ages, so i think they have it down.
If the only thing keeping you away from an iPod is iTunes, then wait for the guys down at rockbox to hack it. Personally, id stick to an Archos, as archopen.org has a NES emulater, and ive got tons of roms for it, so it could do pretty much everything.

[Jon @ Sep 8th 2007 3:26PM]

@dev, probably not as much as the money hat to Engadget by Apple.

[Axay @ Sep 8th 2007 7:04AM]

Hmmm..im getting a red one :) it looks pretty ok,but aint anywhere near the second gen..

[Shy @ Sep 8th 2007 7:05AM]

iPod > Zen. :]

[ark_v2 @ Sep 8th 2007 2:01PM]

Please tell me how; because I'm lost :]

[Shy @ Sep 8th 2007 2:04PM]

iPod - Nice and Shiny.

Zen - Big and Bulky.

:)

[ark_v2 @ Sep 8th 2007 2:19PM]

OMG, another one of the masses, well, whatever.
BTW, The new nano is not shiny ;)

[Shy @ Sep 8th 2007 2:27PM]

Yup, another person that enjoys a fantastic product.

P.S. Turn it around. ;)

[bruckwine @ Sep 8th 2007 7:40AM]

Zen > nano ;-)

[gear @ Sep 8th 2007 7:47AM]

Does anyone know if you can make the ipod Touch retrieve files (music,photos, videos) over the net from Western Digital's world book HDD? What a great device it would be if you could do that. Who would care about storage size of the device if you could get online access to all the stuff you keep at home.

[Jose R. Perez @ Sep 8th 2007 9:14AM]

Apple streams their movie trailers to the iPhone and iTouch (and I was able to stream the Jobs September keynote), so one can stream to these devices, but the files may need to be mp4s, and potentially video files. I would think a web server or Quicktime streaming server are also needed (although I think the Quicktime server is free). Probably just a matter of time before streaming to these guys is even easier.

[ilh @ Sep 8th 2007 7:48AM]

I love how PC world mentions its competitors but no mention of the Zen which wipes the floor with it.

[Clint @ Sep 8th 2007 8:14AM]

Talked one of my friends into buying one for his girlfriend yesterday. They're less ugly in person, the screen is amazing, and they're so thin I'm starting to wonder about structural integrity. I have a hard time believing that something that size can have a 24 hour battery life. (So did one of the Apple store employees). On the other hand, I find it hard to believe something that small can hold over 1500 songs and play video — yet it can. Gotta love technology.

It is a little disappointing that Apple didn't make a 16GB Nano, but it's probably a wise business decision in terms of not taking business from the iTouch, etc.

All that said, it's your money, get the player that works for you. I like Apple products, but the Zen is cool, and I even know someone who bought a Zune and likes it.

No, really.

[Alan Partridge @ Sep 8th 2007 9:40AM]

If you check the small print for battery claims, from any manufacturer, they usually have a few impratical qualifiers such as turning the screen off, using only the supplied headphones, listening only to music encoded at a certain rate, in a certain codec, at a certain volume, turning off all EQ settings and not manually skipping tracks. Also the claims only apply when the battery is brand new.

[ryan @ Sep 8th 2007 4:19PM]

@ clint

that may be the best ending to any comment I've ever read. ever.

[ryan @ Sep 8th 2007 4:19PM]

@ clint

that may be the best ending to any comment I've ever read. ever.

[mynetnerd @ Sep 8th 2007 8:24AM]

I stalked the apple stores in my area within hours of ol' Steve's announcement. Unfortunately I had to wait till Thursday morning to get one....I LOVE IT. This little gem of a gadget it incredibly built and designed. I haven't this excited about a toy since I got my 3rd gen iPod. I watched a view TV Shows on the Nano...not the best size...but the clarity is amazing. Battery is fantastic...Another hit by the geniuses at Apple.

[Arjy @ Sep 8th 2007 8:32AM]

I was at the apple store yesterday playing with the new nanos and I have to say I was impressed as well. When I first saw them in real life, I was worried about how small they were for watching videos, but then I started watching school of rock on it, and wow, they really nailed the size of that screen perfect.

[FrankTheCrank @ Sep 8th 2007 8:55AM]

When Steve announced the iPod Touch, I had to drive to the nearest store and check out the iPhone. I fell inlove after about 20 minutes. I could not wait for the Touch and ended up with an iPhone. Sure it only has 4GB but with the iPhone its not about capacity, its about functionality. This thing is just AMAZING!!

My 30GB 5G is going on eBay tonight!

This message was sent from my iPhone.

[Philipp @ Sep 8th 2007 9:15AM]

Did anyone had a look at the new iPod colors in real-life?
On the pics at apple.com the iPod Nano in Red looks more like an iPod Pink.
However, I saw some self-shot pics and videos in the last days and there it's looking quite like the previous one.

[Galley @ Sep 8th 2007 10:05AM]

A few stores received the new shuffles yesterday, but that's it. They had all colors except the cranberry red.

[Andrew @ Sep 8th 2007 9:31AM]

iPod Nano [69.8 x 52.3 x 6.5mm] = 23,728.51mm^3
The Zen is [55 x 83 x 11.3mm] = 51,584.5mm^3,
iPod Classic [103.5 x 61.8 x 10.5mm] = 67,161.15mm^3

The Nano is less than half the volume of the Zen? My point isn't that the zen isn't as good. it's that they're in totally different categories!

Choose for yourself AND accept others will have different choices.

[WL @ Sep 8th 2007 2:02PM]

The Zen isn't as small would be a more accurate statement.

smaller != better

The 4gb and 8gb models, of the Zen and Nano are priced the same which suggest that they are in the same categories.

Ok so the Zen has a whopping 27856mm^3 more volume.
It also has a 2.5" screen, a mic/ voice recorder, fm radio, and lets not forget the SD/ SDHC card slot.

[Andrew @ Sep 8th 2007 9:35AM]

Alan - I understand your comments on the Creative Zen, and on paper you have a fair arguement, but you did not address what is ultimately the most important factor - user experience. Ok - so your Creative product might have better this and better that, but give a random person both products to play with and then choose from, I see the vast majority of people choosing the ipod, unless they have a pre-harboured hate for Apple. Apple's products just seem to appeal far more sexy and fun to use to most people. (notice the 'most') It's all about INTERFACE. Something your little list of features completely misses. This is something that no feature list can address, nor can the story really be told on paper. Apple are simply the best at making products that people want to have - and that's all it really comes down to. Creative need to realise that the media player game isn't just about giving their products the best features - they need to be fun to use and hard to put down - something that Apple seemed to have spent far more time on than any of the competition.

[Alan Partridge @ Sep 8th 2007 10:26AM]

My point wasn't about what people should like or dislike it was the inherent bias in reporting the new media players. Heaping praise on Apple for minor enhancements (see CNET's review), and even praising them for making the screen smaller than the iPod video. Compare the languge to how they recieve the new ZEN. Eg CNET criticising the ZEN for 'only' having 16GB yet does not do the same for the iPod only having 8GB, PC World not even mentioning the ZEN in the comparison to alternatives, Engadget's hands on with the ZEN (http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/31/hands-on-with-creatives-zen/) etc etc

[SteveMB @ Sep 8th 2007 10:33AM]

Uhh, Apple copied Creative's interface. Not sure what you have there. The Creative Zen is much more better than an iPod, but does it get as much coverage as this? Nope.

[Davedave @ Sep 8th 2007 10:55AM]

Oh god yes, if only Creative would stop putting stupid things like 'features' and 'functions' in their players maybe they'd finally sell some units.

[k-karcher @ Sep 8th 2007 11:04AM]

"they need to be fun to use and hard to put down"

I'm sorry, but that statement is likening an iPod to an exciting adventure or "experiance" that everyone needs to have. Which is just ridiculous in my mind. It's an mp3 player, not a jungle safari.

As for user interface, lets not forget the 100 million dollars Apple paid Creative for its copyrighted user interface infringement. People pick Apple over other brands because "it's an iPod". No other reason than brand name. And I applaud Apple for being able to achieve such a fanatic fan base. It's good business. But I sometimes get the feeling that there's nothing more than a lemming effect with iPod.

I was updating engadget just like everyone else to see what new things had up their sleeve. The iPod classic caught my eye, simply for the storage size versus price. But everything else just seemed to be a gimic to me. I mean, they re-released the iPhone without a feature or two, and everyone still "oooooo'd and ahhhhh'd". Everyone hated the leaked Nano photos, but now that it's official, people compare it to the second coming. I was eyeing the new Zen and wanted to see what the new Nano had to offer, simply because I want my next player to flash based. I don't want an iTouch Pod, because I'd rather have buttons, and something a little easier to fit in my pocket. The 16GB storage (which the nano doesn't even have), the SDHC slot (for all your nonbelievers, it IS SDHC, I have the email from Creative to prove it, which equals infinite expandability), the better screen, equivalent or slightly better battery life, and sleek design sealed the deal for me. Creative's product is just better IMO.

I think that too many people think Apple can do wrong. I mean, there really was nothing inovative here. A nerfed iPhone, an ugly iPod nano, a re-released classic, and the shuffle. Oh, and expensive ringtones. So, what's the big deal?

[matt @ Sep 8th 2007 11:43AM]

"Uhh, Apple copied Creative's interface. Not sure what you have there. The Creative Zen is much more better than an iPod, but does it get as much coverage as this? Nope."

Er, you do realize that the patent only applied to the hierarchal menu system, and no other part of the UI, right? That's a bit different than 'copying Creative's interface". The Zen is nice, but call me when it has a scroll wheel, and we'll talk about who's UI is better.

[Scott @ Sep 8th 2007 12:01PM]

Exactly. I had a Creative Jukebox Zen Extra and that thing had AWFUL UI and even worse client software. I'll never again make that mistake! I got that thing about 80% off retail price and I still didn't use it because it was so damned frustrating!