Apple intros 1GB iPod nano, drops shuffle price | iLounge News


Apple intros 1GB iPod nano, drops shuffle price

imageApple today introduced a new 1GB iPod nano that offers the same features and form factor as the current 2GB and 4GB models for $149. The new lower-capacity nano, which was predicted by analysts, holds up to 240 songs or 15,000 photos. It is available immediately.

Apple also cut iPod shuffle prices by $30. The 512MB model now sells for $69 and the 1GB shuffle is now priced at $99.

“Now everyone can afford an iPod nano, with our new 1GB model starting at just $149,” said Greg Joswiak, Apple’s vice president of Worldwide iPod Product Marketing. “The iPod is the world’s most popular digital music player with over 40 million sold, and now even more music lovers can experience the unrivaled combination of iPod and iTunes.”

[Note: iLounge’s comprehensive iPod nano review now includes new photos and details on the differences between the 1GB nano and its 2GB/4GB predecessors.]

Related Stories



I? said it 1st

Posted by me on February 7, 2006 at 9:03 AM (CST)


Am I the only one who likes having a combo of a Shuffle and a regular iPod?

Posted by M3wThr33 on February 7, 2006 at 9:19 AM (CST)


so the screen costs 50 Dollar as this is the price difference between the new nano and the 1 gig shuffle. well, morons still buy it i guess ...

Posted by user on February 7, 2006 at 9:29 AM (CST)


It isn’t up on the Canada Apple site yet.  I also have a 30GB 5G and a 1GB shuffle and think it is a good combo.

Posted by Tim on February 7, 2006 at 9:30 AM (CST)


I hope Creative and the other mp3 player manufacturers take note and drop the prices of their 1 gig players to a more reasonable price point. I think this is a great move by Apple to capture the lower end of the market. Why spend a comparable amount on a Creative or iRiver player when the 1 gig nano is now $150? If only it had FM radio integrated.

Posted by Dave on February 7, 2006 at 9:33 AM (CST)


The Shuffle is becoming more and more of an “impulse buy” item to me. I have a 4GB Nano, but I’m tempted to pick up a 1GB shuffle just to have something to cart around areas that might be hazardous to a device with a screen.

I can only see this helping Apple next holiday season. Stocking stuffers anyone?

Posted by Moe on February 7, 2006 at 9:34 AM (CST)


This could be worthwhile if they use the shuffle audio chip instead of
the nano audio chip and bigger battery.  Otherwise it is just a more
expensive, shorter battery life, worse sounding, 1 gig player with a
screen and non-tactile controls.

Posted by lunaticpuma on February 7, 2006 at 9:35 AM (CST)


i have a 60gb 5th gen and a 512 shuffle. the shuffle’s perfect for the gym. i don’t have to worry about scratching it or dropping it and it’s still smaller than a nano. that said, i’d like a nano because i think they’re cool, but meh, what’s the point.

Posted by mdwsta4 on February 7, 2006 at 9:46 AM (CST)


You can have FM integrated for another $50 with the Apple Radio Remote.

Posted by David on February 7, 2006 at 9:52 AM (CST)


M3wThr33 Your not the only one….sure hope they keep the shuffle.

Posted by Brad on February 7, 2006 at 10:25 AM (CST)


lunaticpuma (assuming you’re not a bot), you seem to be going around and posting the exact same crap comment all over the net. Same thing you did on TUAW.

Are you being paid to pretend to be ignorant or you’re just plain dumb?

Posted by Unbeliever on February 7, 2006 at 10:32 AM (CST)


nano is way better than the shuffle! This is a ridiculous debate.  Stop Hating because you bought the shuffle. I would rather pay the $50 for the screen. Yes ,I would like to choose what I’m listening to. I have a 4 gb nano and a 1gb shuffle. The only time I use the shuffle is when I’m concerned I could damage the nano. The shuffle is still nice ,but some of the firmware released has been glitchy.

Posted by me on February 7, 2006 at 10:36 AM (CST)


Face it, the shuffle DOES have te best quality sound, but I like the added features of the nano…

If only it were possible for Apple to combine the sound chip from the shuffle with the Nano, then we’d have a KICK @SS DAP.

Posted by ahMEmon on February 7, 2006 at 11:01 AM (CST)


ahMEmon, sorry for not being up to speed, but the shuffle is the better as far as sound quality goes?  I didn’t know that.  Is it also better than the 5G iPod?

As for the 1GB iPod, I kept getting ready to buy my wife one but kept deciding against it, not being sure if she’d like shuffle after using my 5G but also know she doesn’t want to carry a player the size of the 5G around. The 1gb Nano is just right for her.

Posted by 3rdEye on February 7, 2006 at 11:41 AM (CST)


Unbeliever- Sorry, I used copy and paste.  I was trying not to contribute to the thermodynamic death of the universe.  Next time I’ll waste as much energy as possible.

I bought a 4 gb nano only to return it a week later.  The battery life is weak, and measuring battery by using the hold button is ridiculous.  I expect 10+ hour battery life while being able to change songs and volume at will.  Sorry if I’m picky about my audio chips, but my Senn. hd-595s are just as picky as I am.

Yes, being able to pick “that song” is a nice feature, but all other pros lean towards the shuffle IMHO.  I expect nano version 2.0 to be a killer DAP when they include the new lower power audio chips recently announced, but until

Posted by lunaticpuma on February 7, 2006 at 11:49 AM (CST)


Basically this update gives a little something for everybody in all price ranges.  It’s good that the shuffle remains because there are those of us out here that use them at the gym, at work sites, etc, where a nano might get damaged. 

Plus the 1GB nano is now available at a lower price point for those that hate the shuffle and/or only want an iPod with a display built-in.  By doing it this way, Apple is keeping everyone satisfied.

Posted by RC on February 7, 2006 at 12:03 PM (CST)


I would only consider picking this up if you can still compress all your files to 128kbps.

Posted by Iggy on February 7, 2006 at 12:03 PM (CST)



See, if it weren’t for the fact that my music collection isn’t portable on my shuffle, I wouldn’t see any point in this.  But I don’t like having my library tied to one machine.  If I can hook up the a shuffle to two machines, this would be a non-issue to have this new ipod.

Posted by dvddesign on February 7, 2006 at 12:08 PM (CST)


3rdEye: After visisting many iPod discussions, many people claim the shuffle to have the best sound quality of all iPods (dunno if the 5G are included), with clean rich bass and no distortion.

From my own personal tests, I have a pair of Koss Hi-Q earbuds (the model number escapes me) that I used for tests on my own 2g 10 gig iPod, 30gig iPod photo and around 5 co-workers’ shuffles, I can agree that the shuffle has the best and cleanest quality sound with clean, thumping bass and clear, undistorted highs. The downside to the shuffle (at least for me) is the lack of a screen and the lack of any kind of control of your songs apart from play/pause/FF/REW volume up and down. There are no EQ settings to play with.

The other iPods are more than adequate in their sound quality, but if you are a nit-picking audiophile, you will prefer the sound of the shuffle.

Posted by ahMEmon on February 7, 2006 at 12:15 PM (CST)


I’m still waiting for a Nano that can replace my 6GB scratch proof mini.

Posted by Anonymous Coward on February 7, 2006 at 12:35 PM (CST)

Subscribe to iLounge Weekly

Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter

iLounge is an independent resource for all things iPod, iPhone, iPad, and beyond.
iPod, iPhone, iPad, iTunes, Apple TV, Mac, and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc.
iLounge is © 2001 - 2018 iLounge, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy