Slashdot Mirror
Apple Launches 1 GB nano, Slashes shuffle
minus_273 writes "Apple has has released a new nano and also slashed prices on the iPod shuffle. The lowest end iPod now goes for $69. The 1 GB shuffle is $99 and the 1 GB nano is $149." From the article: "'The price of components have come down more than 70 percent, especially flash memory for the shuffle,' he said. 'And the price of the shuffle hadn't changed, so they were making a ton of profit off the shuffle. So they're passing some of those savings on.'"
Could it be... reasonably priced high-demand items from Apple? I though I would never see the day. Nonetheless... I want one :)
There are no uninteresting things. There are only uninterested people.
Wow, they're so cheap, I'm gonna buy two!
No, six!
No, twelve!
BAKER'S DOZEN!
I told you that I'm crazy for those iPods, cousin!
WARNING: If accidentally read, induce vomiting.
iVomit
Oh that Jobs, just in time for Valentines Day...
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." ~The Honorable Daniel Patrick Moynihan
This is a good thing. It will make the iPod more accessible...
Apple will definitely do well with these, given the current reputation of iPods.
Now, if I had just waited until now to buy the kids their 1GB iPods...
A Passionate Independent Musician
I got a 2 gig Nano for Christmas (no complaints mind you), but I already filled it up on the day that I started moving files to it Even then I am constantly scratching my head trying to figure out what songs I can delete so I can squeeze in another favorite song I just picked up.
I could only imagine what the 1gb would be like, but I suppose if you wanted to give someone an iPod on the cheep or had a small music collection then it would be the best route to go.
I had thought about returning it and getting a 4gb nano, but I think that would be rude to the person who got it for me. And come to think of it, I would want around 10+ gb to satisfy my musical needs anways.
Maybe we'll see higher memories by Christmas this year or next.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
...but right now Apple is selling a refurbished 20GB iPod for $189. I think I'd rather go for that one (if I was in a market for iPods).
I thought that was only economic utopia, not reachable in the real world.
Ptah, passing savings on to customers? as if!
So they should. The Shuffle is a flimsy, easily damaged product (I have owned two 512 MB units). Its advertised as a unit to use when exercising, but my experience has been that it is not robust enough to be used in any situation where you and the Shuffle are in motion... Both of mine experienced a steady degradation of the rear slider switch after getting a little damp, to the point where the first one does not power on at all, and the second only works in "sequential" mode - it will no longer shuffle, and I have to cycle the switch on/off many times to get it to start playing. The only reason I persevere with it is due to its small form factor. At $99 a pop I felt ripped off, at $69 it would be border-line acceptable...
... shuffle off its mortal coil. Which is kind of a shame, because it's by far the best iPod model for running and gym work. I may take advantage of the lower prices to pick up a couple of spares...
The headline, "Apple Launches 1 GB Nano, Slashes Shuffle", makes it sound like Apple has stopped selling the Shuffle, especially considering the recent coverage of all the reasons Apple has for cancelling the Shuffle.
I have an original 5 GB iPod. I really want a new nano, but I just can't justify spending all that money for one that holds *less* of my music than my 5-year-old one.
When there's an 8 GB nano, I'll be at my Apple store the next day.
$69, not $99
120 songs, not 3
Otherwise, you make a lot of sense.
Sort of offtopic, but if you are looking for new music for you nano, try to by near a round number. Apple is doing another countdown contest as they approach 1 billion songs. The person who gets the 1 billionth song gets an iMac, 10 iPods, and a $10k gift card.
And about the "great for working out" thing, the 60 gig loads the next bunch of songs in the playlist to 64 megs of memory, and only spins up for about 10 seconds every 45 minutes or so. The 40 gig I had only spun up every half hour. I've gone 4-wheeling for 3+ hours and never had any problems with my iPod.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
3 techno songs is all you need - they pretty much all sound the same
Otherwise, you make a lot of sense.
yah, if you remove the old post, he does make sense...
The NANO never made sense for its cost compared to regular iPods. What made sense is having a screen as well as no moving parts. $149 is almost an impulse buy these days in this market.
I can easily make a play list or two to for times when the nano is more relevant than the full blown iPod. Any truly physical sport comes to mind. I have had my iPod take unplanned jumps to the ground that made me flinch (and reboot it more than once). I would feel much better knowing there isn't something that might suffer serious damage in a fall in there.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Not counting the obvious "It's Apple, must own!" quality of the nano and the mini - the obsession comes from the fact that eventually form factor wins out over budget. Sure I could take my iPod photo biking with me, or to the gym, or whatever, but it would play hell on the hard drive whereas the shuffle won't notice it at all. At least that's the reason I own both an ipod and a smaller (non shuffle) solid state player.
Ad in classifieds: Pandora's Box (no box) $5
Smaller iPod is better for me because 1) I don't listen to that much music, and 2) the less weight in my purse, the better - I have to save room for my other gadgets =P
Besides, the larger ones don't use flash memory right? With the moving parts it's not as ideal for exercising, which is why my roommate wants a shuffle.
And back in the days of the Mini... I could get it in pink. I'm not kidding, I almost bought one solely for that reason.
I have 15 gigs of videos and 4 gigs of space left on my iPod... without it, I don't know how I'd go a day at work. I can't see why anyone would want to bring only 240 songs with them.
And how do you go about listening to more than 240 songs in an 8-hour day, exactly? Do you listen to two minutes of each song?
The full-on iPod is great if, like me, you enjoy selecting albums to listen to on the spur of the moment, but most people just let the MP3 player randomly shuffle their entire playlist, and the iPod shuffle is designed to do exactly that, by pre-caching multiple hours of shuffled music onto the flash drive. It's not for everybody, but I could see how some people would really like it.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
...from the way we're droppin' Hamiltons!
You know where you are? You're in the $PATH, baby. You're gonna get executed!
Funny post, now I know why people like digg better, you can moderate someone beyond -1 !
I bought my suffle the week that Jobs announced it during his keynote in January 2005. About a month later I discovered it wouldn't play anything purchased from the iTunes Music Store. I was told there was a bad batch of the first shuffles and Apple replaced it immediately. Since then I've enjoyed the heck out of it up until this past month. The USB connector on the bottom of the shuffle came loose and popped out one day when I took it out of the USB port on my computer. Apparently one of the two the plastic latches that holds the shuffle came loose due to wear and tear. With expert hands I applied two fine lines of Crazy Glue and my shuffle is back in the saddle again.
And then I drop the white headphones on the floor yesterday and accidentally step on the right ear bud. So now it only plays in the left headphones.
So it appears this shuffle was only built to last about a year, perhaps two. And no, I did not fork out more cash for AppleCare for the cheapest freaking iPod they offer!
Nano? Maybe, I think I might just wait until this shuffle dies completely and spring for the biggest iPod.
That's the beauty of the iPod pricing structure. There's one for everyone, because not everyone who has a large music collection (like you and I) needs to have it on them 24/7 (like me). I don't need to hear an Eminem song and then Vivaldi Four Seasons back to back. :)
I bought a 4GB nano last month, and chose it specifically.
The mainthing I like about it is the robust flash memory and it's small form.
I know I could get 6 times the space for 50$ more, and it's not that I couldn't afford it.
But I'm not fixated on keeping my entire music collection on one handheld device. Sure, it's less work, but most music I only listen to on short term and put something else on later. It kinda stops me getting ored from the same selection aswell.
I just like my nano more than I'd like the standard model.
Because my music taste is so varied, I don't know what I want to listen to for the whole day ahead of time. I go from A3 to QotSA to comedy.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
Your purse? Gadgets? It's nice to finally get to talk to you, Mr. Nick Starr.
The size of the Nano compared to the full on 60 gig video is nothing. The 60g is smaller than a deck of cards!
And about the working out, read my other comment. The hard drive spins up so rarely that it's not an issue.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
Send an ipod to your senator to fight against the broadcast flag and audio flag
But Senator Stevens, the 82-year old committee chairman from Alaska, surprised the audience by announcing that his daughter had bought him an iPod.
Suddenly, Stevens had a much greater understanding of the many ways innovative technology can create choice for consumers. Content industry representatives at the hearing found themselves answering much tougher questions than they typically receive.
http://Lenny.com
So... All they did to the Nano was shrink the memory? There's no mention of whether there were any other "improvements". I've been holding off on getting a Nano (despite how much I want one) because of the rumors about the screen getting scratched easily. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/23/ipod_nano _scratching/)
Were those rumors overblown? And if not, I wonder why Apple didn't promote a solution to that along with these changes.
looks cool and everything, but what is it for?
i have a full fledged ipod (g5 w/ video) and that works great for keeping my total music collection. its fragile, but that's fine, because i don't use it to work out nor otherwise place it in situations of physical danger.
i also have ishuffle, and i use it for jogging and i know it'll never break. there's no hard drive, no display, nothing. and its light as a feather. no extra protection or care needed. plus it doesn't scratch (and even if it did, i wouldn't care).
so, i have these two niches filled and just see no room for nano.
or what am i missing?
So, you know that your music taste is exceptionally varied, and you need the spontaneity more than most other folks do, yet you still "can't see" why "anyone" would want a Shuffle?
That's kind of myopic, isn't it?
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Given the popularity of PC's, Microsoft will do well with Vista. Who knew?
I have a 1GB Shuffle. The 1GB & 2GB Nanos won't be much different.
The point of having/using a small-memory player is not to put your whole collection on there, or to have lots of "if I want" music on there, it's to store those dozen or so albums you are ACTIVELY listening to (or a random mix if you really don't care).
In no way is it meant to hold one's collection; you keep the whole collection on the computer & pick a few things you know you'll want. Small & large storage spaces require very different usage behaviors.
---
The biggest loss from terminating the Shuffle is the built-in USB plug - one less cable to drag around. The Nano doesn't even have a USB socket; instead there's another specialized cable to fill up bag/briefcase space with. The "thumbdrive" format was just so very convenient, both for data transfer and recharging.
---
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
That is an amazingly cool idea for a very deserving cause.
Let me get this straight... they PAY you to sit around and listen to music and watch videos? Either you've got the best job in the world, or you're about to get fired.
Just like clockwork! When they got rid of the iPod Minis it was just after my wife purchased a refreshed one, so she took her receipt back and got a price adjustment. Cha-ching! Wouldn't you know it she has just purchased a refreshed iPod Shuffle! This time she's taking it back and getting a 1-gig nano. We're cheap,but not that cheap.
-- Boycott Shell
I wonder if they have done anything to address the display scratching issue that many nano owners have complained about?
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
Apple's been very shrewd since Jobs's return about presenting consumers with simple, tiered pricing arrangements. Across most of its product lines you're looking at something like a "good - better - best" set of choices to start with.
In the case of iPods you have more steps in the ladder, but it works about the same. The golden rule there is something like "fifty bucks for the next one." For around $50 more, you can always get to the next step in the ladder with more storage or more and better features. In that sense this move makes loads of sense -- even if the 1 GB nano doesn't have what you personally need. The lowest shuffle moves down, the 1GB shuffle hits a $100, adding the nano's screen is another fifty, and so on.
I'm kind of relieved to see Apple not losing its pricing discipline. It's a pricing model that plainly works. The new intel boxes have come out with only a couple of basic configurations, though, and somehow that's ringing false for me...
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
Apple needs to reinvent the Shuffle. People like having an LCD so they can choose songs. Bring back the Shuffle with all its features plus a three-line LCD and you'll have a bigger hit than the 1 GB Nano.
Call it the iPod Micro or (as someone else suggested) the iPod Pico. There's just something to be said for an MP3 player with the ease of use of a USB drive. No cables, just drop it in the front/top USB port and load it and go.
(I'd still like it better if it took a standard battery...my Samsung uses AA and it's nice to be able to swap batteries off a charger in a matter of seconds and to just take a handful of spares when going on a long trip)
120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
Besides, I'm not buying another MP3 player that doesn't have gapless MP3 playback. THAT's the big problem with iPods, IMO.
I use a 1GB Shuffle for snowboarding. Even that is probably overkill. I don't listen to more than 1GB worth of music in a single session. That and it's cheap, so I don't have to worry about breaking anything.
I have a shitty sig!
A screen isn't necessary, but it might be nice. I'm most concerned about durability, battery life, and sound quality.
Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
Since I've recently started going to the gym regularly, I've been thinking I might finally have a use for a portable music player (other than my laptop, which has been as portable as I needed). So, I'm interested in whether or not an iPod would work well for me. A significant constraint, however, is that I don't run Windows, and althouh my wife has an iBook, I don't want to have to use her machine to manage my iPod.
So, how effectively can I manage my iPod from Linux?
Anyone have any recommendations on alternative players? I don't need a lot of storage (1GB would be perfectly fine), but cheaper is better. The ability to play vorbis files would be good, too, though I know that's pretty unlikely. I can always whip up a script to convert my hiqh-quality OGGs to lower-quality MP3s, if need be. If my player doesn't have a huge amount of storage, I'll probably have to convert my OGGs to lower bitrates even if the player does play vorbis files, and that's not much less work than converting to MP3.
Another bonus would be a player with an FM tuner (another feature I believe is unavailable with iPods).
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
*pulls on asbestos suit* With that logic, the same could be said about hip-hop, R&B, heavy metal, or just about any other genre you don't like. Because it appeals to emotions, music is a completely subjective thing. Just because you don't understand its nuances, that doesn't make any genre inherently bad or stupid. Have you ever tried composing a techno song (that doesn't sound like bad videogame music)? It's harder than you might think.
"Make cyberlove, not cyberwar!" -Khaed(544779)
My grocery store is asking $3 a pound for most of its apples. Now if Steve Jobs could only figure out how to make these cheaper!
Okay I'll bite.
Yeah, an lcd is great. but not at the expense of what the shuffle is targeted at. Basically indestructable, simple (did i mention simple?) player that can be operated without looking at it. Think at the gym, out for a jog, cycling, or even on a motorcycle. During those activities, i don't want a device that i have to worry about breaking, or have to divert my attention to operate. not to mention, the lanyard is pretty handy for said activities.
if you want a screen and all the gizmos, just get one with all the gizmos. There's plenty of variations. But don't assume that there's no reason on the planet someone might *not* want the gizmos.
Han shot first.
I carry a DS and a PSP with me usually (games are more important than music to me), so every little bit of space helps. The Nano is significantly smaller and thinner - I could probably fit one into my pants pockets. And don't even try to tell me that I'd fit a 60GB ipod into a pocket. Girls pants aren't designed like that.
I don't have an ipod yet (since I don't listen to music much), but I've been watching very closely to decide which one I want. If it weren't for the video feature of the new ipods, I would definitely go with the nano.
My point is, why get something as small as a gig, when you can get 60 gigs for a little bit more?
Because it fits your needs, elegantly and simply? In a lot of ways your current post is like saying, "Why get a BMW 3-series when you could get a Crown Victoria for less money?" Size, contrary to popular belief, is far from everything.
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
I hate lanyards :)
The Shuffle was an experiment that didn't go the way Apple hoped. Sure it's useful for certain applications, but do you think the typical buyer thinks "hey, I'll get this iPod Mini for when I'm waiting in line at the DMV and this iPod Shuffle for when I'm working out"? I get how not everyone wants/needs the gizmos, but there just aren't enough people who can justify buying two iPods, or want to buy just one without an LCD.
A 1 GB Shuffle will hold 160+ songs if you don't rip them at too high a bitrate. Your average consumer would be more than happy with that as their primary player...but 160 songs without a screen to preview songs might prompt someone to look at another product. Like maybe something not made by Apple.
My Samsung is solid. It's been dropped, thrown, even chewed on by a toddler. I have it with me when I'm doing yardwork, working out, et cetera. It also has an LCD...so it can be done without making the device delicate.
Apple's the one killing the Shuffle, not me. I like the form factor and some of the features of the Shuffle, but the lack of an LCD turned me off from it. They're aborting the product pretty early, which would indicate to me that they're not getting the sales numbers they wanted. They could bring it back as a new iPod without the Shuffle "you nver know what will play next" gimmick that I think really put a lot of people off...I think it would be a lot more effective at grabbing the SFF/budget corner of the market and having the iPod line completely dominate the arena.
(not that I think that iPod gaining marketshare is a good thing...I'm tired of "iPod" being the generic term for MP3 player these days)
120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
No, they pay me to prepare food. A kitchen is a loud hot place, and the music helps keep me from killing my cow-orkers.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
"3 techno songs is all you need - they pretty much all sound the same"
Insightful?
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
"and you need the spontaneity more than most other folks do"
Excuse me, I didn't know you read minds. Well, you're pretty far off.
I don't remember saying that, and, hey, I didn't. I don't know anyone that can predict what kind of music they want to listen to 12 hours in advance.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
I have a 512 MB shuffle and I am very happy with it. I would like to get a Nano, but its not in the budget. I have not even filled half of my shuffle, but having a screen would be nice.
Fascism is the greatest political ideology ever conceived. Sorry.
Too bad they weren't talking about your throat. Stupid hater motherfucker!
What is a 'girl' ?
Insightful?
Only because there's no moderation for "Obvious".
--saint
(It's a joke, son.)
Apple needs to reinvent the Shuffle.
They just did. Didn't you read the headline?
Hmm.... Most flash I've seen is rated for 10,000 - 1,000,000 rewrites per sector (NOR flash). Newer flash (NAND flash) tends towards higher rewrite counts--about 10x what NOR flash offers.
So, let's say you erase/reprogram the entire thing every day, and that that constitutes 2 rewrites. (One for the erase and one for the write, although that's unlikely to be the case.) If the flash is good for 10,000 rewrites, that still gives you 13 years worth of daily updates. Chances are, though, all the flash-based iPods use NAND flash, in which case you're good for 130 years of daily updates.
Granted, the filesystem control structures get written more often than the file store, so perhaps 130 years overstates it somewhat. Still, flash-oriented file systems do try to "level out" the writes that happen to the filesystem's control structures, based on the premise that reads are cheap and seeks are free. Thus, I imagine the unit itself (or its owner) wears out before its flash does.
--Joe
Program Intellivision!
Getting a decent music player that does OGG and normal USB mass transfer is still not cheap or easy. The Xiph list is informative. Iriver players are one of the few ogg players widely available. They don't do USBfs out of the box, and I suspect most "works for sure" players suck that way and you won't find a good cheap player down the street in the US. This leaves you needing to copy your music to mp3 in order to enjoy any of the bazillion cheap portable music players out there but available music managers don't deal with this very well. Even then, finding a player that also works with USBfs is hit and miss.
PDA's running Familiar, OZ or whathave you may provide a better route to music than music players do.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Yep, it can only hold three 180 minute songs.
I have started using a method to get around the gaps in between songs. The gaps only seem to be an issue on albums with seamless transitions or live recordings. If you rip the entire album (or set or whatever) into an AAC file you can create chapters with ChapterToolMe http://www.rbsoftware.net/?page=ctm. It works really well.
Do they have humor where you live?
I'd have thought the problem with strenuous movement on a hd based player is not that the hd spins up infrequently but that when it does you better be fairly still unless you want the heads to crash and not do a whole lot of good to the platters.
Flash if you gonna work it, hd if you not.
I have a iaudio myself, 20gb is good for puting on what random part of my collection i want to listen to (yeah its large no available music player would do unless someone wants to put a 3.5inch hd in one and then yeah i don't want it cause it's too large) and thats because i'd rather support a company that had flac and ogg playback than buy a player that does not but has 3rd party support.
+----------------- | What is the question!
You certainly implied it in the concept that you need a larger iPod to handle your music moods.
Personally, my music moods are also pretty eclectic. However, I can still get that with a smaller player by having Smart Playlists that pick a random selection of songs for me before syncing, or just loading up a variety of songs myself. It won't always get me a specific song, but odds are I'll have something in that vein.
Judging by the number of shuffles I see at the gym and on people who run/cycle/etc... they are quite popular with that segment of the market. Of course you also see other types of iPod and the odd "other player" or two. The new lower shuffle price will probably clinch the sale for me. I've been eyeing them ever since they came out, but as the owner of a 3G 20 GB, Its been hard to justify $100+ for another player. The nano fits the market for those who want more functionality. Apple probably considered a small LCD for the shuffle and decided they couldnt do anything other than "clunky" with it. Apple dosent do "clunky".
>not that I think that iPod gaining marketshare is a good thing...
I have mixed feelings... as a Mac and iPod owner, I want to see Apple do well. OTOH, a near monopoly is never a good thing. Its nice not to be marginalized for a change (something *BSD, linux and Mac users can understand).
If you can fit it all onto any ipod (at any reasonably clean compression rate), it isn't a large music collection. seriously.
Your schwartz is as big as mine.
How does one ork a cow?
hmmm. ok, i probably should have have worded that differently.
my point was that while on paper it would be nice to have all of your music around with you, in reality it just isn't going to work unless you have a smaller collection.
Even if you have a medium or largish sized collection, and can fit it on say a 40 or 60 gb, it starts to be less managable in the form
For any large collection, your just going to have to subsample anyway, and I can't see why you wouldn't want to.
For the record, my CD collection is medium sized; I could fit pretty much all of it onto a 40gb.
We don't need a motherfucking story anytime they release a slightly different product. Holy shit man.. this story is about how they are offering a 1gb player in a slightly different package. There are TONs of products that don't get any coverage that could actually spawn some, you know, discussion. Editors must all be massing Apple stock.. this fucking shit is getting stupid.
So true, although I think you might even be pushing it with 3.
One thing I love about so called techno lovers and their sayings that they don't all sound the same anyway, is that when you make them listen to a few songs in their collection without knowing their names beforehand, they can't name a single one of them.
One of my co-workers got a nano for xmas, & so i finally got a look at one. (up till then i'd never seen one outside of a store display) My first question was what kind of flash memory do you put in it? Wheres the slot for the SD card?
I was astounded to find out that there is none. No way to expand it, no way to switch out cards & have a whole new collection. No way to use a card-reader when you cant find the (proprietary) USB cable.
Leave it to apple to take a great idea, put it in a slick package, and fuck it over entirely by lacking a simple inexpensive feature.
I believe ill stick with my cheap generic mp3 player. Sure its only got 32mb built in, but ive got 5 lil 1 gig cards i can switch out whenever i want.
From a business undergraduate standpoint, I hope they do one soon. I personally feel that the iPod products compare poorly to competing products when it comes to 'functionality' features. For example, if you compare the nano to say, the Sandisk Sansa m200 series, they are both approximately the same weight and size in volume (both the same height, nano is wider, sansa is thicker). The nano has a rechargable, non-replaceable battery (a functional feature, but making it non-removable also reduces it's appeal) and a color screen that supports pictures (a partially functional, partially asthetic feature). The Sansa lacks a rechargable battery and goes without a color screen, but in it's place is an FM tuner (functional) and comes with an armband and vinyl case (functional and specific feature to it's target market), and is priced in the range of the shuffle, which compares so poorly to the Sansa that it's not worth mentioning.
Despite being beaten by both features and price, the Nano continues to outsell the sansa at a rate of about 8-1. I don't know if it's some kind of fad thing or if it has something to do with the fact that the iTunes music store in terms of catalog and interface/functionality is considerably to vastly superior to competing services, or that downloaded iTunes music is designed to only work on iPods. Regardless, committing their resoruces and research to a study on it would be a good read.
Unfortunately, chapters are not yet a complete solution. They have the potential to be the final gap solution on the iPod, but not yet.
A full solution using chapters will:
- Store metadata per song (chapter in this case), regardless of the fact that multiple songs (chapters) are contained in a single file.
- Allow individual songs (chapters) to be treated just as they are currently when ripped the normal way. That is, you can still drag any individual song from a multi-song album file into a playlist, and only that chapter of the file will be added to the playlist. Same goes for Smart Playlists.
- Save on-the-fly metadata, such as play count and last played time, per song (chapter) whenever such a song (chapter) is played. iTunes or iPod, they both have to support it.
Surely this can't be too difficult to do! Please, Apple, please!
Anything less is not a sufficient solution. Steve Jobs, git 'er done!
So what does that prove? I have a huge number of CDs where I know I like some of the songs but that doesn't mean I know the title of it. Sometimes when you get a large collection going on random (say in a CD changer or just shuffling mp3s) I will hit on something I really enjoy and have to actually go looking for the artist and song title. Congratulations to you for having such a small sample that you can know everything about every song. Some of us branch out into more variety...
It would seem that the masses have come to the realization that the batteries are replaceable. Your sad attempts to spread misinformation is no longer being acknowledged. Get over it, your lies have no effect on people anymore.
You clearly work for Sandisk and have a very specific agenda. The market is flooded with poor imitations and none of you manufacturers seem to get that it's not about the iPod itself, it's the whole package. The device, the store and the software which makes it all work together flawlessly. Until you people get it through your thick heads to do some real work and get a real product you're going to continue to fail miserably.
I carry a DS and a PSP with me usually (games are more important than music to me), so every little bit of space helps.
Oh, THAT'S what you meant when you said you needed room in your purse for "gadgets."
Whew! I had steam coming out from under my collar for a moment there. I thought you were talking about a totally different soft of gadget which some women like to own. Never mind.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Is it flash or a small hard drive? Please say it's flash!
Hmmm... Pie...
People calling for Apple to kill the Shuffle -- or who simply shake their heads, baffled as to why Apple continues to make something with such little obvious appeal -- should keep in mind that the Shuffle makes a very good "starter" DAP for kids. Short of dunking it in a juice glass or leaving it on the bus, there's darn little a kid can do that will trash it. I know several kids who got low-tier MP3 players this past Christmas: two of them got Shuffles, and two others got SanDisks along with an explanation/apology that they would've got Apples, they were just "too expensive." With these price reductions, that will no longer be a factor. Each kid, as they get older and accumulate pocket money, is going to want to upgrade, and while the SanDisk kids could go either way, the Shuffle kids are almost certainly going to want to move up to another iPod (if for no other reason than to protect their iTMS investment); my niece, in fact, was promised a Nano for the summer if she took decent care of her Shuffle. As long as Apple isn't losing money on them, the Shuffle acts as a very good "gateway" into the iPod family, and it makes sense for them to keep it going as long as is feasible.
You could try using Rockbox for your nano - they've just managed to make the sound driver work. Rockbox supports FLAC, Ogg, mp3, Musepack, etc. It's still a bit rough on the edges, but it's pretty cool - plus customisable play screens rock!
After a few months of carrying my white nano in my pockets together with my cell phone and other stuff (no keys, though, they're in the other pocket :-), it looks similar to how my second-gen iPod looked after that kind of abuse. Sure, there are visible scratches, especially if you hold such that light reflects off it, but that's to be expected. There's really no actual problem with the white nano, as far as I can tell.
The problem may be that these scratches are more easily visible on the black iPods. I don't know, since I don't know anyone with a black iPod.
Mr. Pibb + Red Lace = CRAZY DELICIOUS
Red Vines
You know where you are? You're in the $PATH, baby. You're gonna get executed!
Sure I could take my iPod photo biking with me, or to the gym, or whatever, but it would play hell on the hard drive whereas the shuffle won't notice it at all.
My second gen. 10 GB iPod was in my vest pocket when I crashed my motorcycle and slid on my chest (and bare arms! Ouch!) Due to ablation, the leather pocket wore away and my iPod received a huge scratch. Actually more of a jagged irregular bevel along one edge. It never skipped a beat.
I'm not saying that your strategy isn't a good one; I'm just saying that the HD based iPods are pretty sturdy. Good thing it wasn't spinning when I hit the pavement, though!
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.