Apple Computer iPod nano (Second-Generation) 2/4/8GB | iLounge

Reviews

26

skywriter, you must not have done that much research, as everybody's been predicting this for at least 2 months.

But don't feel so bad. The 1G Nano still kicks ###. And every time Apple brings out a new product there's always a big group of people who unwittingly bought the old model a day earlier. The price we all pay for Apple's infamous release strategy. For myself, I bought a G5 single-core iMac a week before the integrated camera model, which is about two months before the intel model came out. And my 1.83 GHz MacBook Pro was almost immediately supplanted by a 2 Ghz model for the same price.

C'est la vie en Pomme.

Posted by dasmegabyte on September 14, 2006 at 11:24 AM (PDT)

27

I just got home from the Apple Store where I purchased my 8GB 2G Nano and the XtremeMac MicroMemo. When I connect the module to the Nano it does. in fact, bring up the voice recording interface, but when I attempt to start recording it says "This accessory is not supported by this iPod."

This seems to be in line with what the store employee said and what the packaging from XtremeMac (iPod video support is required), but since I had seen this tested and proven in this review I assured them it would work.

So how do I get it to work as you did in your review? Otherwise I will have to take it back and try the Belkin one as one of the major reasons I got the Nano was so I could record class lectures, so I need a viable recording solution.

Posted by AZRaptor on September 14, 2006 at 1:13 PM (PDT)

28

Unfortunately you cannot edit posts. I figured out that for this to work you have to update the Nano to iPod S/W version 1.0.1. This can be done directly through iTunes 7.0. After I updated the actual iPod software the recording function with the XtremeMac MicroMemo is working as described.

Posted by AZRaptor on September 14, 2006 at 3:01 PM (PDT)

29

I ordered my custom engraved 4G blue iPod on the afternoon of the 13th and it shipped the morning of the 14th! I can't wait until it arrives.

Posted by Brycej in Canada on September 14, 2006 at 3:38 PM (PDT)

30

Does the camera connector work with 2G nanos? How about firewire? (i'd expect neither to work)

Posted by h0mi in USA on September 14, 2006 at 5:48 PM (PDT)

31

You forgot to mention anything about gapless playback in the review

Posted by kapi on September 14, 2006 at 5:55 PM (PDT)

32

phennphawcks:

I think your idea is great too, but I'm not sure how well the Mac/PC differences would work. I would think that'd be a piece o' cake on the Mac. The PC I doubt.

They can't include the Mini-CD because slot-loading drives can't use mini-CDs. so all the portables wouldn't be able to use it, and I think the iMac also has slot drives (I'm not sure .. I don't own one .. yet). So including the Mini-CD wouldn't really help that many people, and would just add cost and trash.

Posted by Tom Craft on September 15, 2006 at 2:53 AM (PDT)

33

h0mi:

Firewire won't work as the required chip is physically not present.

Posted by Tom Craft on September 15, 2006 at 2:54 AM (PDT)

34

Not sure how a product can get an A- rating from a great resource like iLounge when it requires software that is obviously full of bugs and poorly tested.

That should ding the overall rating in a big way!

Posted by JWj on September 15, 2006 at 8:07 AM (PDT)

35

Apple already has the slowest USB 2.0 on the planet in their Macs and the new nano is only half the speed of the old one for transfering data. I'm guessing they went with really cheap flash to keep the component costs down. That totally sucks because other companies are pushing performance by putting dual channel controllers into USB flash drives costing as little as $29.

The camera connector doesn't work with the new nano.

Posted by bregalad on September 15, 2006 at 10:36 AM (PDT)

36

with respect to adding a graphic eq, i think it wouldnt be a very good idea. first of all, if you want better quality and clarity, quit listening to mp3s and AACs. rip and listen to WAV files if it's that important to you. secondly, quit using those earbuds. they are bad for your hearing and have the worst frequency response of any type of headphone. thirdly, a graphic EQ separates the signal into many different frequency bands (usually 31). when gain is increased or attenuated on the respective bands, there is a small amount of delay added to that chunk of the signal. when you add a little bit of delay to all 31 pieces of your signal, you're left with many phasing issues, and ultimately could make the sound worse.

Posted by soundchaser on September 15, 2006 at 10:38 AM (PDT)

37

Radio!!!

why is there a Radio listing on the menu settings on the new ipod nano...

Posted by eboy on September 15, 2006 at 3:41 PM (PDT)

38

Though not quite as loud or dynamic as the iPod Video, the new Nano is considerably louder than the 1G Nano. The overall sound quality is the same, though. Decent bass, clear mids and sharp highs, but the lower mids and bass are still stronger in the Video.

The included headphones sound rather like the previous model, but I've never liked earbuds anyway. Your best bet is either to get the new Apple in-ear headphones, or better yet, get Sony's Fontopia in-ear headphones. They don't come with the slick carrying case Apple designed for their own phones, and the use of an extension cord that makes the overall length of the cord too long for some uses, but the bass is phenomenally richer, deeper and more powerful from the Sony phones. Midrange and treble are about the same for both Apple and Sony.

Shop around on Amazon, and you can find a pair for less than the Apple headphones are priced in stores, but again, be ready for an extremely long cord, a cruddy carrying case that can be thrown away the moment you open the package (seriously...you can't fit the headphones in it, so it's really a worthless piece of plastic), and get ready to untie knots frequently after laying the headphones down, but their sound quality at least if not more than makes up for these minor inconveniences.

Posted by lrphotographer on September 17, 2006 at 1:53 AM (PDT)

39

On another note, has anyone experienced issues with their new Nano randomly rebooting itself? Every so often, when I'm skipping through songs, it'll just up and restart. No idea what's causing it...whether it's a software issue, a firmware issue, or a hardware issue. Hopefully it's something that'll be fixed at some point in an update. Otherwise, I may be one of the unfortunate saps who has to send it in for a replacement as a result of buying one so soon after the 2G's release.

Posted by lrphotographer on September 17, 2006 at 3:04 AM (PDT)

40

Okay. I have yet another post to make about the new Nano. It's a dust eater. I've had it for just over 24 hours now, and tiny specks of dust and lint have entered the casing to come to a rest on the actual LCD inside. This reminds me of zoom lenses for SLR's that actually change the length of the body as you zoom. Any time these lenses are designed in such a way, they invariably allow dust, lint and other debris to enter the barrel and come to a rest on internal elements, which can really pile up over time.

Perhaps Apple will offer internal cleaning with battery replacement for these down the road, since they'll already have them open and capable of being blown out with compressed air. Let's hope. Otherwise, it'll only be a matter of time before your screen will become so covered with crud that it'll be damned hard to see it. And skinning or casing it won't prevent this phenomenon, I assure you. However, this isn't likely to present a serious problem for quite a while after buying one...just something of which folks needs to be aware.

Posted by lrphotographer on September 17, 2006 at 12:34 PM (PDT)

41

Update on my earlier post about poor sound quality on my 2G Nano. I tried the suggestion about letting it burn in, but this did nothing. I called Apple about it and they sent me a new one and a mailer to send the old one back, no problems. The new one sounds great, but a few hours after I started using it the screen died. It still plays just fine, but no display. Called again and another is on the way. Grrrrr! Agravating! hmmm Never had a lick of trouble with my old Nano. Hope this and all the problems people are having with Macbooks and Macbook pros isn't an indication of Apple's quality control slipping again. Both my Minis and Dual G5 has been flawless, thou. Guess everybody has lemons from time to time.

Posted by vapor on September 19, 2006 at 1:42 PM (PDT)

42

Just a question, is the blue in the nano the same as the mini?

Posted by johnnay. on September 19, 2006 at 2:44 PM (PDT)

43

Johnnay,

The old Mini was more of a turquoise, whereas the new blue is more blue. Much less green in it. But, the color is also much more vivid/saturated. The new colors definitely pop more than the old ones. Of course, it could simply be that all the Minis I've seen have faded and/or changed over time, whereas the new Nanos haven't had time to do that yet.

Posted by lrphotographer on September 20, 2006 at 8:17 AM (PDT)

44

IRphotographer,

Thanks! I have an iPod mini (blue, 2G) and I was just wondering if it was different, because in some pictures it looks the same, and in others it looks different.smile

Posted by johnnay. on September 20, 2006 at 12:52 PM (PDT)

45

I've used my 4 Gb blue nano for a few days now and prefer the audio to the previous model. I'd be a bit firmer than the review - it's now very good, bass is definitely more prominent, the sound is better balanced, and the spatial/3D effects are simply better. Not quite up to the existing shuffle, but not far off and I actually prefer the new nano's balance. I use SHure e4c's BTW. If only I could afford e500s..!

Posted by drevo_uk in UK on September 21, 2006 at 10:50 AM (PDT)

Page 2 of 3 pages  <  1 2 3 >

Recent News

Recent Reviews

Recent Articles

Shop for Accessories: Cases, speakers, chargers, etc.