Which iPOD?

D

diablo111

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 26, 2004
Messages
1,734
iPOD Nano @ 2GB

or

Ipod Mini @ 4GB

I'm, not real familiar with either...is the only advantage to the Nano it's size?
 
EgyptBoy20 said:
nano. color screen and photo support, but it's very prone to scratches.
Click to expand...

Personally I think you should get a case anyway, they now come with slip in pouches and there are some cleaners you can use that polish away the scratches.
Songs load faster, I'm pretty sure the battery life is faster but I don't know, it might be the same.
I'd say nano unless you have more than 500 songs
Oh yeah, if you accidently drop your nano it will be fine, but the case is not the same with the mini
You cannot use the nano as a boot drive
 
Both are ripoffs compared to the original. Come on now, the original is still tiny, and you get a ton more space for the money, go for it.
 
NulloModo said:
Both are ripoffs compared to the original. Come on now, the original is still tiny, and you get a ton more space for the money, go for it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I agree. I'd rather have 60GB than small size.
 
Xephian said:
Yeah, I agree. I'd rather have 60GB than small size.
Click to expand...

The thing is you can have 30 or 60 GB and small size. It isn't like we are comparing a 12 lbs laptop to a 2 lbs one, we are comparing something smaller than a pack of ciggs to something the size of a pen drive. Once you get things that small, it doesn't matter as much between them all.
 
My budget is $200 or lower...it's also for my wife so ease of use is a must.
 
remember nano is flash based and mini is hd based. mini cant be exposed to too much shock while the nano can.
 
going from apples specs online, the iPod nano is 350% smaller in volume and 366% lighter than the iPod 60GB... not exactly insignificant
 
cair0 said:
going from apples specs online, the iPod nano is 350% smaller in volume and 366% lighter than the iPod 60GB... not exactly insignificant
Click to expand...

but the normal ipods arent exactly big anyway
 
when you got a small poacket or other things in your pocket - it is alot smaller - i own a 2g and i love it - but the ipod nano 2g is $249 US. - i dont know if you can buy an Ipod fo $200 or less unless used.
 
I'd get an iPod mini. Twice the capacity for the same price, longer battery life (if you make sure you get a 2nd-generation mini), and no worries about scratching the case. What does the nano get you? Photo support? The screen is the size of a postage stamp. Color screen? It's going to be in your pocket, why does that matter?
 
DanK said:
I'd get an iPod mini. Twice the capacity for the same price, longer battery life (if you make sure you get a 2nd-generation mini), and no worries about scratching the case. What does the nano get you? Photo support? The screen is the size of a postage stamp. Color screen? It's going to be in your pocket, why does that matter?
Click to expand...

Good points!
 
I3roknI3ottle said:
they have a 4GB nano for 250.
Click to expand...

what the HELL!?
That is such an unbelievable ripoff!

So let me get this straight, you can get a 20GB Mp3 player for $50 LESS than a 4GB Mp3 player, and you still get 5 times the storage capacity?

Apple has sunk to new lows.
 
If you want my suggestion, don't bother with the Mini.... Go ahead and purchase the Nano, just for the smaller size, flash storage, and color screen. Saw them for the first time this weekend in person and they're are amazing. But if you have a lot of music go ahead and get the more amazing iPod regular with video play back.

By the way what are you a PC or Mac user, with the iPod need? The iPod is easy enough for any untech savy person to figure out.
 
Cowcaster88 said:
By the way what are you a PC or Mac user, with the iPod need? The iPod is easy enough for any untech savy person to figure out.
Click to expand...

See sig...:)

(PC USER)
 
do you really want a PORTABLE player that ull be carrying around everywhere to have moving parts inside, that are very sensitive to shock and magenetic dmg/dataloss???

hard drive suck for portabile applications...

its much more preferable to get a flash based device, like the nano or shuffle, id never even consider spending any significant amount of money on a hdd based player..

keep in mind, yes the nano is only 2/4 gb, but thats 500-1000 songs... thats like 25-50 hrs of continual playback, do you really need more than that???? considering they are very easy to push different music into and out of via usb/itunes.
 
My wife will be using it at work (sit down job)...maily to listen to music without the hassle of changing cd's, or having to mess around with it.

Do you have to use itunes with the shuffle or nano? That would be a huge minus...
 
diablo111 said:
My wife will be using it at work (sit down job)...maily to listen to music without the hassle of changing cd's, or having to mess around with it.

Do you have to use itunes with the shuffle or nano? That would be a huge minus...
Click to expand...

You can use EphPod or ml_ipod instead of iTunes.

And yes, the 22+ million harddisk-based iPods sold so far (not to mention the millions of players sold by other manufacturers) are all of a flawed design, they have moving parts, no way they'd ever survive, what pieces of garbage. :rolleyes:
 
I would go with the ipod mini b/c the nano is so small that you could probally accidently crush it.
 
I personally have an ipod mini... I got it for free or I would have ended up getting a non-apple player. Seems like you get more for your money with the majority of the other players on the market... you just dont have that "status symbol" hanging out of your pocket so girls will give you reach arounds.
 
Tengis said:
I personally have an ipod mini... I got it for free or I would have ended up getting a non-apple player. Seems like you get more for your money with the majority of the other players on the market... you just dont have that "status symbol" hanging out of your pocket so girls will give you reach arounds.
Click to expand...

Why do people always say that Apple players are overpriced? You can often see just where the cost savings went on other players: cheap materials, for example.

Besides, unless you can somehow score one buried in the back of a store, there aren't iPod minis to buy. The iPod nano is the only official choice, and while it's more expensive for the same storage, it's actually the cheapest high-capacity flash player out there. That can mean something if you're doing a lot of exercise.
 
DanK said:
I'd get an iPod mini. Twice the capacity for the same price, longer battery life (if you make sure you get a 2nd-generation mini), and no worries about scratching the case. What does the nano get you? Photo support? The screen is the size of a postage stamp. Color screen? It's going to be in your pocket, why does that matter?
Click to expand...

Umm... you also get something that doesnt have moving parts inside. You know that hard drives will break if they experience a lot of shock right? I'm not saying that hard drives suck, i have a 5g video myself. Its just each player is for a different purpose.
 
what is all this about how hdd players suck? i have a first gen 40gb ipod and i have never had it skip/break down. in fact, i'm listening to it now and it's like 4 years old.
 
peterhoang2002 said:
You know that hard drives will break if they experience a lot of shock right?
Click to expand...

The 6GB Hitachi Microdrive used in the mini is rated for 200G operational shock (2000G non-operational). Anything, moving parts or not, will break if it experiences a lot of shock. If you're smashing something you own around with that much force, it will probably break.

Everybody seems to be bringing up the "negatives" of hard disk players, but nobody has mentioned the inherent problem with flash players: flash memory has a finite number of erase-write cycles. Given two otherwise equal mp3 players, one HD-based and the other flash-based (with equally good care given to both), the flash-based player will be a paperweight long before the HD-based player has a hiccup if you change the music that's on it regularly. Yes, I realize that the number of cycles is greater than 1,000,000 these days, but that's still a limit that hard disks don't have.

OK, so the bottom line seems to be this: if you plan on punting your iPod across the house, get a nano. If you're going to take care of it, and want to keep it for a long time, get a mini (if you can find one).
 
DanK said:
You can use EphPod or ml_ipod instead of iTunes.

And yes, the 22+ million harddisk-based iPods sold so far (not to mention the millions of players sold by other manufacturers) are all of a flawed design, they have moving parts, no way they'd ever survive, what pieces of garbage. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Funny I hated I-Tunes so bad i got rid of my I-Pod and you post this. Doh!
 
c0ex said:
I would go with the ipod mini b/c the nano is so small that you could probally accidently crush it.
Click to expand...


a site didnt extensive testing on it and they sat on it, ran it over al tat and it lived - it wasn until they finally threw it as high in the air they could and let it drop that it finally stopped working.


Do that with a mini and the first thing to go will be the harddrive. - yes millions of IPOD were sold- and how many have been replaced for bad / dead harddrives....

Yes alot of people take care of their toys - just as many dont.
 
The nano can overclock pretty good. But you may need some additional cooling for it.

Who's going to use 60gigs anyways? Even 20gigs? I smell a pirate.
 
I wouldn't go with the shuffle, you cant select the songs you want, you have to go through a whole list of songs just to get to a specific song you like. If this is for your wife too, than unless you liston to the same type of music, i would go with almost anything else.
 
Firebat said:
The nano can overclock pretty good. But you may need some additional cooling for it.

Who's going to use 60gigs anyways? Even 20gigs? I smell a pirate.
Click to expand...

WTF are you talking about? Overclocking?? Not sure I'm following you...

As for 60GB of MP3's? That is alot...I have my whole CD collection ripped and it's only about 9GB...throwing the word "Pirate" around is kind of uncool though...please don't get my thread locked. :)
 
I hate the suffle!

Yay 1000 songs, Yet you can never choose

Yes yes playlists and so on but really,


"Hmm im happy i think il listen to, What the shuffle decides!"


:mad: :mad: :mad:
 
danielj315 said:
I hate the suffle!

Yay 1000 songs, Yet you can never choose

Yes yes playlists and so on but really,


"Hmm im happy i think il listen to, What the shuffle decides!"


:mad: :mad: :mad:
Click to expand...

For what and where (work) my wife is going to use it...the screen is almost pointless. She allready has a CD/MP3 disc player...but she always has to mess with it. She's a candy decorator, so she has a bag of icing in one or both hands all the time...having to keep putting it down and losing he rythm to change a song or skip somthing or change a cd is the problem.

Having alot of music that can be put on random play and not have to mess with it is the key. I think I will go with the shuffle...
 
That may be, but the Shuffle is very limited in how it handles music. If you move the unit from one machine to the next, your songs will get replaced, no reordering if you use iTunes. My wife uses a Shuffle for when she works out, and sometime's she wants to get rid of one song on the unit or update her songlist. Guess what? IF she plugs it into her work computer after updating on her home computer, iTunes will delete all the content on the unit. Grr...

While you can use 3rd party apps besides iTunes, I've learned that the all in one function of ripping and catalog organizing more than makes up for its short comings. I use to use three different apps with my Nomad Zen. One for doing LAME encoding, one for tagging ID3's, and one for playback. I get this all in iTunes. If you choose to rip into MP3 format instead of AAC, the underlying MP3 encoder iTunes uses is the LAME encoder.

Personally, I'd recommend a Nano for its size. Its small, can be tucked away, and you can create playlists to suit your mood. You can also buy the Laniard (sp?) accessory where it hangs over your neck like a necklace while having the headphones all built into the unit.

-E
 
Well crap...nano's are out of stock at newegg and they don't have the 1GB shuffle, just the 512MB...I was planning on using my newegg preferred account...guess I'll think on it a spell...please keep the opinions coming.
 
Well from what I have seen at work, the Ipod videos seem to be the best bang for your buck as far as having video capabilities and storage. Also they are a fairly small size as well which is also a plus since many of the others are slightly bigger. Not sure if I have seen another mp3 player that has a 60gb hard drive in it either.

Just my two cents

Edit: BTW if you are going to punt your ipod accross your house, get a shuffle. you will most likely break the screen on the nano if you do that:-P
 
DanK said:
nobody has mentioned the inherent problem with flash players: flash memory has a finite number of erase-write cycles. Given two otherwise equal mp3 players, one HD-based and the other flash-based (with equally good care given to both), the flash-based player will be a paperweight long before the HD-based player has a hiccup if you change the music that's on it regularly. Yes, I realize that the number of cycles is greater than 1,000,000 these days, but that's still a limit that hard disks don't have.
.
Click to expand...

I know this is a stupid point, but I just had to point out that even if the number of cycles were 1% of what you stated, you'd have to change your playlist everyday for the next 27 years of your life to reach your limit. There is no advantage, other than the current size/price ratio, to having a hdd based player over a flash.

The current ratio difference is quite substantial though, which is why I decided to go with a hdd based player. Flash is a great tech, but I think it's still early enough in its application to mp3 players that the manufacturers can still get away with charging steep prices for the "large capacity" ones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top