8 & 10 GB iPod Nanos Rumored

koweja writes "The UK based technology magazine T3 is predicting that Apple will release larger iPod Nanos in the near future. From the article, "Munster's reasoning is that, as the touchscreen iPod will likely not now appear until next year, Apple needs to launch something eye-catching in time for the lucrative run-up to Christmas - and bigger capacity nanos fit the bill nicely." Granted it's an almost completely unsubstantiated prediction from somebody outside of Apple, but it is what a lot of people have been asking for since the original Nanos came out."

Wow! Baseless speculation!

[Anonymous Coward]

Gosh... here's some more... Apple will eventually release a 16 gig ipod Nano! You heard it here first.

Anyway, a 10 gig Nano makes no sense. 8? Sure, but 10? No. It can't be a single chip, and the size difference between it and an 8 gig isn't enough to justify the price difference for most people.

Does size matter?

[simonjp]

Why really needs a size like this? I have a MDplayer and 1GB on my PDA and survive easily (even got a movie on the pda, but not found a long enough tube trip to watch it all yet). Cynical people like me might think that it could be a gimmick where they can reduce supplies of the smaller memory sized nanos, and sell the bigger (oh look more expensive!) nanos... surely they have a bigger margin on those too ?

Re:Does size matter?

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I don't really want to hassle with changing what's on there when I get bored of the selection.

You don't have to. I have my iTunes auto-rotate tracks on my 4GB nano. It's not obvious, but what you can do is sync the unit to one or more smart playlists. The smart playlists are set to randomly select a certain number of tracks that have been played less than "X" number of times. Right now, my "X" is "1". Once it has been played, it is removed and another track replaces it. With this scheme, I think I can do very well with a 1GB nano.

Re:Holy **** people...

[gravesb]

If people are willing to purchase a larger capacity iPod, why shouldn't Apple offer it to them? Companies should never limit sizes because a few people don't understand why you need that much hard drive(or flash memory) space. When we went to Iraq, everyone who had iPods copied their entire music selection to their iPod, and those who didn't had almost no music. If you build it, they will come. Also, what are people supposed to be focused on while on public transportation? Its not like they are driving...

Re:The Point here is...

[edwdig]

On a conference call to discuss the results, Chief Financial Officer Peter Oppenheimer said iPod gross margins were above 20% during the quarter, and that according to NPD Techworld, the company now holds 78% of the U.S. market for MP3 players.

Found the quote in this article: http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?g uid=%7B96F58ECA-995C-42E4-ABAB-A3CBA070E6E1%7D&sou rce=blq%2Fyhoo&dist=yhoo&siteid=yhoo [marketwatch.com]

I'd consider that to be making goood money off the main device.

166 CDs is not a lot

[tepples]

I don't think that there are a lot of people around who could fill 10 GB with legal music.

10 gigabytes * 1000000 kilobytes per gigabyte * 8 bits per byte / 160 kilobits per second / 3000 seconds per CD = 166 CDs. I know a lot of people who own two or three times that many. Given that CDs have been around for over two decades, 8 CDs a year is not that many.

But for the iPod Nano? Flip-books?

Google sees over 13 million slide shows available through the Web [google.com].

Apple has never competed on price

[cgenman]

Apple has never competed on price. The basic iPod is still the most expensive MP3 player by about 30%. And for the cost of a 4GB nano, you can get a 20GB HDD based MP3 player. Heck, you can get a 20 GB Archos Jukebox for 100 dollars [dealtree.net] if you look.

Where Apple shines is form factor. That Archos Jukebox can be amazingly cheap, but it won't fit in your pocket. The iRiver [iriver.com] is a powerful, fully featured player, but just try to get it to do anything without taking a course at your technical school. Even the regular iPod is big by many people's standards, leading to the popularity of the Mini and Nano.

And if you haven't held it in your hands, the Nano is damned small. This thing could fit in a wallet. It can fit in the tiny key pocket on most jeans. You don't have to decide between taking your iPod or your PDA (or your iPod or your Compact, etc). Just take 'em both. They'll both fit.

Besides, if you're comparing USB drives, why not compare to the Shuffle [apple.com]? 100 dollars for 1GB of storage, which includes the battery and playback interface out of the box. Not an amazingly low cost solution, but not bad compared to the rest of the stuff in that space.

An MP3 player is more than just flash memory, you know.

Re:why?

[matt21811]

"10G strikes me as too small for a regular music collection."

Actually, 10 gig is almost exactly the size of average music collection when stored in 128kbit compressed format. This BBC article shows that men own, on average, 178 albums (women, on average, own less).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/410 2786.stm [bbc.co.uk]

178 (albums) * 650MB (maximum data per album) * 128 Kb/sec (good quality compression rate) / 1411.2 Kb (per sec data rate e on the CD) = 10493.5 MB. This is over just 10 GB to store the average mans music collection.

Re:Nanos were made to have smaller capacity

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"if they increase the storage capacity it gives people less incentive to buy a more expensive regular iPod."

This is probably why the other iPods support video, now. In any event, yes there's less incentive to buy the more expensive regular ipod, but there's also more incentive to those (like me) who don't want to pay $300+ for that iPod. I actually never seriously considered buying an iPod until the Nano came out. $200ish price tag + really small + adequate storage == MobileTatsu friendly. (I only really need between 2 and 4 gig.) If a little more disposable income had come my way, I probalby would have bought it. From where I sit, it expanded their market. But, that's just my humble opinion. :)

Still waiting for video on nano

[dalmiroy2k]

I know the screen it's small but believe me, it has enough resolution to play videos. I have a Rockbox on my nano and Doom really looks great, even better that the GBA version. Also the included 3d screensavers like "plasma" and "fire" are neat.
I wish Apple includes video support in an upcoming software upgrade.

Re:Nanos were made to have smaller capacity

[Overly Critical Guy]

The nanos were made with smaller capacity because those 2GB flash chips were what was available at the time. The chips are already expensive as it is, and the 4GB nano is using two of them. It has nothing to do with "balance." Apple just loves to sell iPods, and if the minis and nanos outsell the bigger versions, they're fine with that since it's more money for them. Steve Jobs predicted the nano would be the biggest selling iPod ever, so they know what models appeal to consumers.

Re:Just 10GB?

[Anonymous Coward]

My wife and I have well over 2000 CDs (rock, movie soundtracks, classical and world music), and I've ripped all of them to 320kps .mp3 files, for best quality. Yes, we can't fit as many music tracks on our 40 and 60-gig iPods, but we can get literally hundreds of CDs on them.

However... I'd still like to have MORE. When we travel abroad (for weeks at a time), I like having giant amounts of music at my disposal. If Apple offered a 100-gig iPod, I'd buy it. If Apple offered a 1-terabyte iPod, I'd buy that, too.

(IMO, Nanos are (excuse me) mostly for kids who cycle through songs every other day, and when they get tired of "My Humps," instantly switch to the newest fad song. For my wife and myself, a Nano is ridiculously limited in size.)