Comments on: 7 Reasons Why the iPhone nano Is a Bad Idea

By: metalmacsmopars

metalmacsmopars — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 20:34:08 +0000

Honestly, I think it’s an incredibly idea. Every time I see an idiot with an iPhone I think, “there’s $1200 a year out the window!” I am a Mac nut (own 9 Macs, 3 iPods, and countless accessories), but I will NEVER pay the price of a decently-sized HDTV per year for internet/phone access! Now with the iPhone Nano, Apple could omit the internet (3G Network) and leave the WiFi (from the iPod Touch), it would stay the same size as the current iPod Touch and have most of the other functions of the fully-featured iPhone. I wouldn’t even care if it were only pennies less the the iPhone. I would buy one today if I knew I wasn’t FORCED to pay an extra $30 per month for internet access.

By: Sergey

Sergey — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:20:18 +0000

Here in AUckland we like to fuck any asshole that we see – if you see it, you like it, stretch it out..

By: Ravemstr

Ravemstr — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:50:39 +0000

Yes! it’s absolutely crazy to think that nokia could sell their 6230i phone on a 1.000 USD price tag with just a shell switch.
And the examples can go on! It can be a very nice phone! I, for one, would like my iPhone the size of a HTC Diamond…

By: Aaron

Aaron — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 08:30:10 +0000

Agreed. That is an excelent way to grow the product – make current models the baseline and continue to add significant value upward. Great article.

By: Ace

Ace — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 22:23:23 +0000

I have another carrier, with great rates and do not want to lose this just for a phone.

So Give me an Ipod nano that is smaller like the HTC touch or pro. Let me use my old carrier, and not AT&T (It’s actually the only reason I haven’t switched). & Let me use it as a modem for my laptop, with my current minisd card and you got a new customer.

Period

By: Aviv

Aviv — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 19:02:56 +0000

Hey Aaron… I’m primarily saying this would be a bad idea more so than it’s not technically possible. I’m sure it’s possible, but developers that I know and have spoken with would NOT want to see their detailed graphics scaled down because Apple thought it was a good idea. Unless they see direct sales impacted greatly by the new market share of “iPhone nano” owners, there will most likely be a lot of frustration. Not to mention that many applications requiring massive processor power won’t be able to run on this new iPhone, which in turn leads me to believe that Apple would then cut a certain section of the app store, which then leads me to believe that would just be INSANE! So, what is the point of an iPhone nano?

My stance: Make the current models the “nano” devices and let’s start moving up. More storage, faster speeds, more options and improved specs.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:55:02 +0000

Aviv,

Great article! Can you clarify one area I didn’t follow – why would having a Nano iPhone “assume that Apple would scale down the app store, or limit applications”. Can they have the same successful app store on a rumored Nano? Currently, the iPod with video and the iPod Nano have the same resolution screens. Could the rumored Nano use the same screen resolution on a smaller screen resulting in no impact to the app store?

By: Allen

Allen — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:45:41 +0000

I think an iPhone nano would be cool but these pictures are obiously fake why would they just make it shorter they would be more likely to make it 2/3 porportional.

By: Jason Noer

Jason Noer — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 00:16:11 +0000

The purpose of the nano is not to be a smaller iPhone. Its purpose is to replace the standard cell phone. Everyone wants an Apple phone but most people can’t afford an iPhone, or don’t want to pay for internet service that they’ll only use in the bathroom stall at work. There are a LOT of these people, and Apple is smart to expand their customer base with this device. Even if Apple can replace 20% of current cell phones with the nano, it would be a huge coup.

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 21:48:39 +0000

An iphone nano is a great idea assuming it would resolve the issues of why I haven’t bought an iphone to date.
I love the idea of an iphone but I cannot see why I should have to suffer with a poor value O2 contract which forces me to pay for a wifi connection to a web of wifi hotspots which I would never use, plus I have to fork out money for the iphone in the first place.
For me, an iphone nano would (with 3G) be able to tackle the mainstream mobile market and offer the majority of phone users like me exactly what they want, reasonably priced mobile fun!
The normal user who would never frequent mac blogs would be perfectly happy with a iphone which didn’t have GPS or Wifi capabilities but still offered the Apple web browsing apps store experience.
Apple would just have to make sure that the battery which would fit a smaller iphone nano is up to the job. Perhaps that’s what’s been holding them back till now.

Personally I cannot see what the problem would be with the virtual keypad. The supposed iphone nano will be the same width as the current iphone so you’d end up loosing some space above the keyboard without the need for a smaller virtual keyboard. So the experience would be much the same, just less space above for the text.

An iphone nano with 3G, potentially no GPS or Wifi but with a decent battery and memory would be a true iphone killer. Finally Apple would have an iphone available free on the same contracts as other phones, an iphone available at a reasonable price on pay as you go.

Also the way I see it, that Apple failed in its attempt to get a percentage out of what we pay for a calls, Apple main income comes from the basic sale of the phone and then from the apps store. Wifi and GPS are not essential to this, so if Apple can produce a device which is cheaper to build and therefore cheaper to sell and still offers user the possibility to access the apps store and buy apps, they are on to a real winner.