Quote:
Originally Posted by PB PM
Its the smallness of it that makes it a Nano, that thing is huge and would be extremely awkward in your pocket. The 2G Nano is the only thing I can stand in my pocket at work, the 3G is too fat and that looks much to tall. I rather like the smallness of the 2G screen, its there to help find your music and play it, not to put on a show. Small and simple, that is the key, too bad Apple lost sight of that with the new UI etc. I also have the black 8GB 2G so, I guess it doesn't have as much of the "floating" with the clickwheel.
|
Again, that mock-up looks to be almost exactly the size of the 2G iPod nano (I wouldn't be surprised if it was, just as the 2G iPod nano was almost exactly the same as the 1G). So I don't get the "huge and...extremely awkward" comments. Everybody thought that the 3G iPod nano looked fat until people actually realized that, wait a minute, it was thin (although technically slightly larger than the 2G). This is the same - in fact, I'd bet it's smaller by volume than the 3G (just as the 2G was).
The fact that the screen is vertically oriented when holding the iPod nano "upright" means that the "splitscreen" menu from the 3G nano is probably gone. Since you seem to hate the new UI, that's a good thing, right?
I don't really see how anyone can feel that this is anything but the best of both worlds. It seems to have the smaller size, more pleasing proportions, and simpler menu of the 2G iPod nano, with the larger screen and video capability of the 3G. The only downside is that you'd have to rotate the iPod in order to view video, which is something Apple obviously tried to avoid with the iPod nano 3G (I'm guessing Jobs considered it "inelegant"), but is that really that big a deal?