New To Mac-Forums?

Welcome to our community! Join the discussion today by registering your FREE account. If you have any problems with the registration process, please contact us!

Get your questions answered by community gurus • Advice and insight from world-class Apple enthusiasts • Exclusive access to members-only contests, giveaways and deals

Join today!

 
Start a Discussion
 

Mac-Forums Brief

Subscribe to Mac-Forums Brief to receive special offers from Mac-Forums partners and sponsors

Join the conversation RSS
Apple Rumors and Reports Discuss what's going on with Apple in this forum

Apple exploring shrunken audio jacks for even smaller iPods


Post Reply New Thread Subscribe

 
Thread Tools
the8thark

 
Member Since: Jan 27, 2007
Location: *Brisvegas*
Posts: 5,658
the8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to all
Mac Specs: 17 inch 2 GHz C2D imac (5,1) with 3GB DDR2 RAM, X1600 (128MB memory) GPU - OSX 10.6.3

the8thark is offline
Apple exploring shrunken audio jacks for even smaller iPods
AppleInsider | Apple exploring shrunken audio jacks for even smaller iPods
Quote:
In its continuous pursuit to create smaller, more compact devices, Apple has shown interest in creating headphone jacks for iPods and iPhones that will take up even less space inside a device.
QUOTE Thanks
SweetCosmicPope

 
SweetCosmicPope's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 16, 2009
Location: Baytown, Tx
Posts: 373
SweetCosmicPope has a spectacular aura about
Mac Specs: Late 2009 Macbook Pro 2.26, 160gb HD, 2gb RAM, OSX 10.6; Emac 1.42ghz 80gb HD 2gb RAM OSX 10.5

SweetCosmicPope is offline
I've been curious to know how well the new smaller nanos have been selling.

I went with my wife to multiple apple stores to see if they still had any 5th gen nanos in stock. Every last one of them indicated that people keep leaving when they hear that they only have the new smaller ones. We ended up ordering one at amazon.

I'm not sure smaller is better for the bottom line if the Houston apple stores are any indication. Now, if this space-saving could make room for extra features such as bringing back the camera and video playback, this could be good.

"That's Peter Graves scat! I'd know it anywhere!"
QUOTE Thanks
iggibar

 
iggibar's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 20, 2009
Location: C-Town
Posts: 4,065
iggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to behold
Mac Specs: Mac Pro 4.1 15" MBP. 13" MBP. 17" PB. Power Mac G5. iPhone 5s 64gb

iggibar is offline
I still like the previous gen with the camera. I don't need touch screen on a nano! The upside to the new gen is that they make the previous gen cheaper. 100 bucks for a refurb is too good of a deal imo! I bought one for my dads birthday last year, and I still like it, even though it's the version without the camera.

“If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself but to your own estimate of it; and this you have the power to revoke at any moment.” Marcus Aurelius
QUOTE Thanks
the8thark

 
Member Since: Jan 27, 2007
Location: *Brisvegas*
Posts: 5,658
the8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to all
Mac Specs: 17 inch 2 GHz C2D imac (5,1) with 3GB DDR2 RAM, X1600 (128MB memory) GPU - OSX 10.6.3

the8thark is offline
Are people not getting the new nanos cause they don't like them or cause the old generation are just as good but cheaper?

To me the current nanos are like holding a matchbox in your hand. You almost have to old it in your fingers as it's too small for the palm if your hand. But the old nanos you can hold in the palm of your hand and the click wheel you can use with your thumb. I think the new nanos are better though as a camera on a nano - really people that's s gimmicky. On the touch though it's a good idea.

Amyways I think the new smaller audio jacks are simply to make the nano/shuffle even thinner. I can see the day where the shuffle is just as thin as a piece of glass and on the back is a pice of velcro or similar and you just slap it on your shirt or pants or bag. And the difference between the nano and shuffle would be GB capacity and the shuffle would be a click wheel whereas the nano would be a touch screen.

To me the two things holding the nano/shuffle back from being even thinner is the audio jack/dock connector and the clip. Fix those and you'll have one ultrathin device.
QUOTE Thanks
iggibar

 
iggibar's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 20, 2009
Location: C-Town
Posts: 4,065
iggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to behold
Mac Specs: Mac Pro 4.1 15" MBP. 13" MBP. 17" PB. Power Mac G5. iPhone 5s 64gb

iggibar is offline
I believe size factor and comfort will show that the new nano will not be as successful as the previous gen. The previous gen was a hit because it pretty much captured the athletics department. Literally, everyone I know who goes to the rec center to work out/everything else, has a version of the previous 2 gens of the nanos. It was easy to use, and you could just slap it on your arm, while knowing where the physical buttons were. With this, if you don't use the buttons on the earbuds, you have to use the screen. It feels kind of awkward to hold too while trying to use the touch screen.

But, back to the topic, about them requiring things to be even thinner with their ipods, but am I the only one who prefers them to not be so thin(only talking ipods here!)? I miss my ipod video 30gb...because I knew I was holding a brick. Soon enough, we;re probably going to have implantable mp3 players!

“If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself but to your own estimate of it; and this you have the power to revoke at any moment.” Marcus Aurelius
QUOTE Thanks
steventz

 
Member Since: Sep 28, 2010
Posts: 5
steventz is on a distinguished road

steventz is offline
Everything should have a 3,5mm jack. Personally I think it's annoying if you need adapters if you want to hook up something else.
QUOTE Thanks
the8thark

 
Member Since: Jan 27, 2007
Location: *Brisvegas*
Posts: 5,658
the8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to all
Mac Specs: 17 inch 2 GHz C2D imac (5,1) with 3GB DDR2 RAM, X1600 (128MB memory) GPU - OSX 10.6.3

the8thark is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by idrinorbarsaku View Post
Soon enough, we;re probably going to have implantable mp3 players!
Well similar technology I have been reading up on in in development in 2 industries. The first is medicine. For really tiny microchips for implanting into the body to cure many conditions. And the 2nd is the clothing industry. You'd have the chip woven in the fabric. Almost like a smart fabric And I'm sure one day you could buy a shirt with an MP3 player woven into the fabric and a pair if wireless headphones would be all you'd need to listen to your tunes.

Sure that's really nothing to do about shrinking the audio jack. But still it's all miniaturisation of the products we know and love.
QUOTE Thanks
SweetCosmicPope

 
SweetCosmicPope's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 16, 2009
Location: Baytown, Tx
Posts: 373
SweetCosmicPope has a spectacular aura about
Mac Specs: Late 2009 Macbook Pro 2.26, 160gb HD, 2gb RAM, OSX 10.6; Emac 1.42ghz 80gb HD 2gb RAM OSX 10.5

SweetCosmicPope is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by the8thark View Post
Are people not getting the new nanos cause they don't like them or cause the old generation are just as good but cheaper?

To me the current nanos are like holding a matchbox in your hand. You almost have to old it in your fingers as it's too small for the palm if your hand. But the old nanos you can hold in the palm of your hand and the click wheel you can use with your thumb. I think the new nanos are better though as a camera on a nano - really people that's s gimmicky. On the touch though it's a good idea.
I honestly don't know. I know in my wife's situation, she didn't like to lose the camera and video playback, and using the tiny touch screen was kind of awkward.

I think the touch screen idea was neat, but I think they should have integrated it into the previous hardware and kept the camera and playback.

I'm not exactly sure what purpose having a small touch screen does, especially when it takes away alot of the functionality that it previously had. Just adds a few "oohs" and "aahs."

"That's Peter Graves scat! I'd know it anywhere!"
QUOTE Thanks
iggibar

 
iggibar's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 20, 2009
Location: C-Town
Posts: 4,065
iggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to behold
Mac Specs: Mac Pro 4.1 15" MBP. 13" MBP. 17" PB. Power Mac G5. iPhone 5s 64gb

iggibar is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetCosmicPope View Post
...but I think they should have integrated it into the previous hardware and kept the camera and playback.

I'm not exactly sure what purpose having a small touch screen does, especially when it takes away alot of the functionality that it previously had. Just adds a few "oohs" and "aahs."
ditto!

“If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself but to your own estimate of it; and this you have the power to revoke at any moment.” Marcus Aurelius
QUOTE Thanks
the8thark

 
Member Since: Jan 27, 2007
Location: *Brisvegas*
Posts: 5,658
the8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to all
Mac Specs: 17 inch 2 GHz C2D imac (5,1) with 3GB DDR2 RAM, X1600 (128MB memory) GPU - OSX 10.6.3

the8thark is offline
I know what it does. It makes people who want the camera to cough up the cash for the touch. Apple sucked you in with the camera in the old Nano. And now to have the camera you have to upgrade to the touch. So Apple get even more money from you. Sneaky tactics I do not particularly like. But hey Apple are out to make money like any other company I guess.
QUOTE Thanks
cwa107

 
cwa107's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 20, 2006
Location: Middletown, Pennsylvania
Posts: 26,575
cwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 15" MBP, Core i7/2GHz, 8GB RAM, 480GB Crucial M500 SSD

cwa107 is offline
It's funny - I bought a Nano just a few weeks before the new touchscreen version was released. When I saw the new one, I had absolutely no regrets. Bigger screen, more functionality and now a lower price. How can you go wrong?

Smaller is not always better. I think Apple hit the sweet spot with the last generation. The clickwheel was functional and simple for what is a functional and simple device. A tiny touchscreen is worthless to me. If I really wanted that kind of an interface, I'd step up to the iPod Touch.

Liquid and computers don't mix. It might seem simple, but we see an incredible amount of people post here about spills. Keep drinks and other liquids away from your expensive electronics!
QUOTE Thanks
the8thark

 
Member Since: Jan 27, 2007
Location: *Brisvegas*
Posts: 5,658
the8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to all
Mac Specs: 17 inch 2 GHz C2D imac (5,1) with 3GB DDR2 RAM, X1600 (128MB memory) GPU - OSX 10.6.3

the8thark is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwa107 View Post
Smaller is not always better. I think Apple hit the sweet spot with the last generation. The clickwheel was functional and simple for what is a functional and simple device. A tiny touchscreen is worthless to me. If I really wanted that kind of an interface, I'd step up to the iPod Touch.
But what if you want that interface but can't afford or do not want to pay the touch prices? Then the new Nano is better for you. The old Nano's camera only took video and no still pictures. That was the deal breaker for me. I really wanted a still camera in there. To me having radio is more important then a video only camera. The touch screen to me is no more important than the old click wheel as both seem to work just fine.

I'm sure the new Nano will have it's market. But it's sales figures will really tell how successful it'll be.
QUOTE Thanks
CrimsonRequiem

 
CrimsonRequiem's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jul 24, 2008
Posts: 6,006
CrimsonRequiem is a name known to allCrimsonRequiem is a name known to allCrimsonRequiem is a name known to allCrimsonRequiem is a name known to allCrimsonRequiem is a name known to allCrimsonRequiem is a name known to allCrimsonRequiem is a name known to all
Mac Specs: MBP 2.3 Ghz 4GB RAM 860 GB SSD, iMac 3.4 GHz Intel Core i7 32GB RAM, Fusion Drive 1TB

CrimsonRequiem is offline
I also liked the older Nano. The one with the click wheel and it just plays music. Simpler is better. I don't really see the need to add extra features to it that just gums it up and it's also not very practical at that size as well.

死神はリンゴしか食べない。
QUOTE Thanks
SweetCosmicPope

 
SweetCosmicPope's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 16, 2009
Location: Baytown, Tx
Posts: 373
SweetCosmicPope has a spectacular aura about
Mac Specs: Late 2009 Macbook Pro 2.26, 160gb HD, 2gb RAM, OSX 10.6; Emac 1.42ghz 80gb HD 2gb RAM OSX 10.5

SweetCosmicPope is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by the8thark View Post
But what if you want that interface but can't afford or do not want to pay the touch prices? Then the new Nano is better for you. The old Nano's camera only took video and no still pictures. That was the deal breaker for me. I really wanted a still camera in there. To me having radio is more important then a video only camera. The touch screen to me is no more important than the old click wheel as both seem to work just fine.

I'm sure the new Nano will have it's market. But it's sales figures will really tell how successful it'll be.
There's lots of things I can't afford, and thus, can't have. We have a saying here in Texas: "Tough t**ty."

Now, I like your idea of the still camera. That would have been a feature that would be easy to integrate and give people a good reason to make the jump from the previous generation: Have your digital camera and mp3 player all in one small package.

"That's Peter Graves scat! I'd know it anywhere!"
QUOTE Thanks
B0yB0y

 
Member Since: Sep 29, 2010
Posts: 48
B0yB0y is an unknown at this point

B0yB0y is offline
Shrunken audio jacks does not mean that they are going to make smaller iPods, it just means that they are going to make shrunken audio jacks.

i hope they make a new Classic with this design....
QUOTE Thanks

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe


« Touch Screen imac patent | Apple's Steve Wozniak Appears on CBS's Big Bang Theory »
Thread Tools

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
[How To] Macintosh Keyboard Short Cuts hype.it Switcher Hangout 25 06-09-2009 09:53 PM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:25 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
X

Welcome to Mac-Forums.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

New members like you have made this community the ultimate source for your Mac since 2003!


(4 digit year)

Already a member?