As predicted by just about everyone, Apple rolled out a new line of iPods yesterday.
Let’s take a look at the latest offerings:
The new Nano – not sure what they were thinking with this one. The new form factor is definitely a huge step back from the slim Nano versions of the past. Short and wide does not make a good replacement for tall and narrow. The main reason it would seem for the change is to enable video on the Nano. This is something that I’m sure some people asked for, but the existing iPod screen was already a bit small for watching videos and this smaller 2 inch version is going to be even less pleasant. People who want video iPods are likely to want a larger screen and more storage than 8GB. Then again, it could be argued that with a 5 hour or less playback time, storage space may not be that big a deal provided you bring your computer with you to swap out videos. I know that I would not want to watch a video on a 2 inch screen. If I’m going to watch a video, I want the wide screen that is available on the iPhone as well as the new iPod Touch.
As for the new iPod “classic” (what’s up with this? Apple hired some former Coca Cola product people?) the revamped standard iPod now sports a thinner profile and a larger hard drive – 80 GB and 160 GB . The 160 is definitely the right size to drag a large movie collection around and the 7 hour battery life on the 160 is a nice feature for those coast to coast airplane flights. The downside is that you are looking at only an extra half inch of screen over the Nano – still too small for long term viewing.
Which brings us to Apple’s final new entry, the iPod Touch. Widescreen mode? Check. Wireless Internet Browsing using Apple’s Safari browser? Check. YouTube player? Check. Touch interface developed for the iPhone? Check. Decent sized hard drive for storing all of those movies and music? Arrgh! 16 GB? You have to be kidding me. This is the flagship of the iPod line and they hamstring it with a lousy 16 GB. Okay, maybe I’m being too hard on it. Apple wanted to keep the form factor close to the iPhone. When you look at the video playback time – it’s only five hours and that is with NAND flash as opposed to a hard drive. Put a battery sucking hard drive in there and that playback time would probably barely give you enough for a single movie. Apple had to make a choice with this one, and upon further reflection they probably made the right one. Unless they wanted to make this bigger and fatter, they could not have stuffed a hard drive plus a larger battery into it. 16 GB is still plenty more space than you need to put all the movies you can play on it. If you simply forget about storing your entire music collection and use it as a video player and web browser, it is a pretty nifty gadget.
So, what is missing? Well, it would be nice if Apple included Bluetooth so that you could pair it with a cell phone and browse the Internet using a different carrier than AT&T, but that would probably cannibalize their iPhone sales, so don’t hold your breath. I for one not mind a larger unit with a 160 GB drive and bigger battery if it meant that I could finally have the perfect iPod for me. Apple could also solve that problem by making the battery replaceable and allowing me to cart several batteries with me on long plane flights.
Which model should you buy? Well, it depends on how you plan to use it. I would probably give the new Nanos a pass and see if you could still get one of the older models at a discount if you are looking for a compact form factor. You are probably not going to enjoy watching videos on it and you really can’t fit all that much in 8 GB. The classic is the way to go if you want to carry most of your music and videos. Finally, if you are video watcher and don’t mind lugging a computer for syncing on your trips, the touch is probably the model for you.
