Headphones & Mp3 Players forum

General discussion

iPod touch vs. iPod classic vs. iPod nano

by Timmy454 / October 19, 2007 1:06 PM PDT

I currently have an iPod touch 8GB, and am considering returning it. Some reasons for possible return: I want to save some money, the nano is adorable and comes in cool colors, Wi-fi is not really that practical (I love surfing the web on it, but it isn't that big of a deal for me), I don't download music through iTunes wirelessly, and I think the classic is a better overall value. I have 5.2GB free now, so a nano isn't completely out of the question. One thing that I would miss would be the touch screen, which is delightful to use. I am really leaning towards getting an iPod classic, but the nano is still a possibility. My content is mainly audio and podcasts, but I would expand my library to video if I had more space. I am wondering which one someone would get in my situation. Thanks!
-Tim

Post a reply
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: iPod touch vs. iPod classic vs. iPod nano
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: iPod touch vs. iPod classic vs. iPod nano
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Disk Mode
by Timmy454 / October 19, 2007 1:20 PM PDT

I just remembered that disk mode would be a plus for me. Happy

Collapse -
it sounds like you almost made up your mind....
by ktreb / October 19, 2007 1:42 PM PDT

Classic?
I think I would do that if I was in your situation. You get more bang for your buck. For the time being, hard drive players will remain the better value.

Fortunately for me, I don't really have to make a choice. I kind of collect iPods. I have six of them, 2 of them are shuffles (they are my "mug me" iPods), a Mini, a 2nd Gen Nano, a 5.5 Gen iPod, and the 8GB Touch. I use the latter 3 on a more regular basis. The large iPod is mainly for music. I have more music than will fit on it. The Nano gets used when I want to travel light or work out. The Touch is mainly for videos, a few podcasts, and some music. I've watched movies and tv shows on the 5.5 Gen and it's not a bad experience. But I was looking for something with a bigger screen and better battery life for video, which is why I got the Touch. As you know, the Classic has improved its battery life for video from the previous generation.

As much as I love my Nano and as cute as the new one is, I couldn't see myself watching video on it. The screen is just a tad bit too small.

Good Luck!

Collapse -
I would go for...
by koolman51 / October 20, 2007 12:10 PM PDT

The iPod classic because it has more bang for you buck, and is a player that should last you for a while, and all the problems you hear about the classic should be fixed on firmware version 1.0.3

Collapse -
I bought...
by Timmy454 / October 20, 2007 1:20 PM PDT

the iPod nano 8GB Black. It is so cute and it seems to works fine for me. Thanks for all your help!!!!

Collapse -
Everyone says to try the Classic and he went with a Nano,
by BeatleMegaFan / October 21, 2007 5:13 AM PDT
In reply to: I bought...

LOL. Personally, they look so ugly in pictures, but at the Store, they look somewhat nice... but I love my Touch and my other iPods more. I use my Nano for everyday music, 5G Video for when I want to listen and watch all my songs and movies, and my Touch... I guess I just enjoy the ability to watch Cover Flow move around, web browsing, downloading... :-)!!!!!. 16GB is plenty for music in my case, but bigger sizes for flash drives would be nice. I have already used about 5GB just for songs, and who knows how long it'll last with movies.

I hope you do not watch videos on such a small Nano. If you do, get a magnifying glass. At the least the Classic and Touch have some reasonable screens, though I prefer an actual TV. Each to their own I suppose.

Glad you like your Nano though. I can't wait for the Beatle iPod though. Collecting iPods is fun in some way, save the emptiness you feel in your pocket ;-).
-BMF

Collapse -
Why didn't I listen to you guys!!!????
by Timmy454 / October 23, 2007 11:03 AM PDT

God, I should have listened to you guys. The screen is too small for video, and I mean WAY to small!!! It has multiple dead pixels (so did the touch). I definitely am returning it tomorrow for a classic. I should have listened to you two saying classic... i am such an iPod n00b!!! LOL!!! This will be my third new iPod within the past two weeks!!! lol My friends told me the same thing "Get the classic" lol. I am glad that you guys guided me in the right direction (iPod wise). Thanks, and if this doesn't work, I am going Creative Zen!!!
-Tim

Collapse -
if video is so important
by JonTitor / October 23, 2007 11:12 AM PDT

why don't you get a PVP?

Collapse -
Technically, it is one, but the Archos 605 would be better
by BeatleMegaFan / October 23, 2007 1:50 PM PDT

suited for a PVP. Bigger screen, TV recordings (with dock), touch screen that rivals the Touch... more bang for your buck, but you still pay more for it I suppose. I wasn't aware the new models were catching dead pixels this early in their release.

Hmm... well I can say my Touch has none for the time being Happy . Seriously, try the Classic. Perhaps you'll have better luck.
-BMF

Collapse -
no
by JonTitor / October 23, 2007 4:07 PM PDT

the Classic is a PMP
a true PVP has video playback as a primary feature

Collapse -
Before buying a Classic
by ktreb / October 23, 2007 2:47 PM PDT

See if you can get your hands on someone's 5th Gen, or Classic if they have one and watch a few videos on it. Then you'll know whether or not it will work for you. While I said it wasn't a bad experience, I still thought a larger screen was more desirable.

Collapse -
It's a PVP since it has a 160GB HD for movies, but
by BeatleMegaFan / October 24, 2007 6:59 AM PDT

yes, iPods are more for music. I'd call it a PVP since movies take up a bunch of space and you can fit a nice amount of movies on such a large HD. But whatever you want to call it, the Classic is still a pretty good thing in this case.

Maybe some people don't like small screens, but I think it depends on what you're doing with it. I feel fine with watching a movie on my video, but I don't feel fine playing, let's say Halo, on a DVD player screen (for those who haven't heard of this, it's possible and very easy to do). I think that for storage and stuff that you want to watch away from home, the Classic works.
-BMF

Collapse -
a harddrive doesn't make a PVP
by JonTitor / October 24, 2007 11:15 AM PDT

I remember a modder once added a 250GB harddrive to a Nano, again not a PVP
beside's Apple doesn't even market it for it's video playback which isn't too good on a 2.5" QVGA 16-bit screen

Collapse -
True. I agree, but I was coming from a different view.
by BeatleMegaFan / October 24, 2007 12:08 PM PDT

I use my Video primarily for movies and videos. I use it sometimes for music, but I hook it up to speakers or something. It's more of a storage thing for me.

I consider it a PVP because that's how I use it. It really isn't when you look at it your way, but same principle LOL.
We're both right in a way.
-BMF

Collapse -
it's not a way to look at something
by JonTitor / October 24, 2007 12:30 PM PDT

ok sure, the requirements to be a PVP isn't written in stone or anything, but it's not something you can declare a player to be just because of the way you use it.
Many people watch videos on iPods but that's why it's a PMP, all PMPs are capable of videos and pictures
PVP is a type of PMP that takes it and really pushes for video features

Collapse -
I KNOW what it is. But they're still all PVPs or PMPs.
by BeatleMegaFan / October 24, 2007 1:55 PM PDT

Look, I understand. I prefer that the large capacity iPods are called PVPs. That's how I see it, even though they're PMPs. They're really just different forms of Mp3 players with different capabilities, which is what you sort of said. But same ideal.

I'm not trying to press my case on anyone. I meant to state my opinion. PMP or PVP, it still does the same thing in a way. Alright? Sounds good to me that we just agree that they both do the same thing and leave it at that. I don't want to argue this, which is becoming somewhat pointless as the original poster said he will opt to get a Classic now. Man, the new Nano... I saw a person using it and it's just too small for anything but music! You can barely put videos on 4-8GB stuff anyway.

You know I heard that Cover Flow and the HDs in the Classics were very slow. Cover Flow is one thing, but the Classic shouldn't have too many problems. My Video is two years old and is running great, so the new Classics should be better than it. Of course I bet they are, but one thing I notice about my Video is that the battery life is much better now than it was many months ago. Before, I could only watch one TV show or music videos and the battery would drain almost completely. Now, I can watch 2 or 3 complete films before it drains. That's pretty interesting for the original Video. Though the HD seems to rotate more often... I fear I may have to send it in for replacment eventually... But I love it for what it does. You know, I wouldn't mind replacing my old Video for a new Classic, but I have the Touch, so I'm happy for now Happy (hence the smiley LOL).
-BMF

Collapse -
What exactly is a Beatle Ipod?
by lisa.s.25 / January 9, 2008 8:59 AM PST

Hey im looking into maybe getting a new ipod and ive never heard of the beatle ipod before. When does it come out and what are the basic specs??

Collapse -
There is no such thing, sorry if you misinterpreted it
by BeatleMegaFan / January 9, 2008 10:30 AM PST

Some people speculate that Apple will offer a limited edition iPod if they ever are able to offer The Beatles' catalog on iTunes, kind of like the U2 thing. I was just making a comment. As of right now, there's not one bit of evidence of a "Beatle iPod", though Apple and Apple Corps are coming to an agreement soon... I personally don't want the catalog on iTunes. Ruins their music and makes it seem like it is just music available for download when it is much, much more than that. They changed the world and people should respect them for that at least. But I can drone on about that for awhile ;-).

Sorry if I confused you. The only iPods currently produced are here.

A Beatle iPod would look nice if Apple made one I suppose, but I feel that the catalog shouldn't be put onto iTunes if I hadn't made that clear before, LOL.

-BMF

Collapse -
questions about storage
by Dred242 / October 26, 2007 3:57 AM PDT

I'm in the market for a new iPod myself, but I still have questions about storage. I was looking at the comparison info on the Apple website for all the iPods and noticed that the 8GB nano and the 8GB iPod Touch have different capacities for song and photo content.

8GB iPod nano
songs = 2000
photos = 7000

8GB iPod Touch
song = 1750
photos = 10,000

Shouldn't they both be the same?

Collapse -
You'd think so, but remember that the Touch has a larger OS.
by BeatleMegaFan / October 27, 2007 2:14 PM PDT

The Nano has the standard OS with Cover Flow in it. Do not forget that the Touch has a bunch more stuff loaded onto it. It also has to do with how the OS formats the data if I remember from another thread correctly. And also, one of my ideas is that the Touch adds data to the songs on it, or at least it limits them due to all the bells and whistles it has for the screen and Cover Flow. You can do quite a lot of stuff with the Touch when playing music. Maybe all the extra stuff put into the songs on the Touch does not apply to the Nano. When I plug my Touch in, it used to say 5GB of music stored when it had less than 4.8GB uploaded or so.

Photos: format is my guess... though the comparison chart would have to list the same type... if you look again at the fine print on the Apple site, where it lists the chart, it says the photo capacity depends on the viewable photos uploaded through iTunes to it.

Not sure if this solved your question, but that's my two cents.
-BMF

If you get either one, be sure to not watch videos on the Nano; screen is way too small for that!!! Touch has a nice screen for viewing movies and whatnot, and YouTube streaming is excellent.

Collapse -
storage answer
by Dred242 / October 27, 2007 2:22 PM PDT

Ok BeatleMegaFan, I'll buy that explanation.....thanks.

Collapse -
It may also depend on the formatting of its flash drive too.
by BeatleMegaFan / October 27, 2007 2:46 PM PDT
In reply to: storage answer

Formatting does play a role here. Don't know how to explain it exactly, but I can say that you're really getting similar specs in the end and all you have to decide on is the price and storage. I went with a Touch for the touch screen and 16GB sounded good to me, but you may favor the Nano since it's very small and light in hand. Whatever works for you.

I think I have over 1000 songs on my Touch right now, and since I have the 16GB, I've got plenty more room to use up, with the exception of the occasional movie or TV show.

Don't count on me here, I'm just telling you what I think. If it agrees with you ( Happy ) then okay. If not, that's fine too. Seriously though, the Nano just seems too small for most people. They look so different in the ads and online, but they're like the size of a normal eraser, but thinner.
Glad I could help you out,
-BMF

Collapse -
Ease my craving for a new device!
by Dred242 / October 27, 2007 3:49 PM PDT

Currently I have a 20GB iPod Photo which I never fill completely with music and photos, it's half full most of the time. I update or swap-out smart playlist all the time, and I only use it at home or on long trips. I also have a 2nd Gen iPod Shuffle that I only use for podcast playback while at work (10hr work days). The only issue I have with the iPod touch is the 8-16GB of storage. I'm sure it's just a pet-peeve I have about going backwards on storage, but it just seems wrong for me to reverse course on storage. Everything else about the iPod Touch I like. I guess the only reason I'm even considering the iPod Classic at this point is because of the increase in storage over my 20GB iPod and finally...video playback. Perhaps I'll wait until summer 2008 in hopes that Apple will re-fresh the iPod line up....mainly a 32GB iPod Touch.

I have 46.5GB's of music...and rising!
I buy 1 album per month from iTunes!
I buy 1-2 single tracks per month from iTunes!
I've only downloaded 4 TV shows from iTunes! (Watched each one once)
I would rarely watch a video on a small screen. (Any player)
I would regularly use video-out feature to watch videos on a larger screen. (Any player)
I regularly download 12 video podcast weekly! (Watch then delete on 2nd hand laptop)
I download and listen to 32 weekly podcast! (Only sync to my 2Gen Shuffle)
My 2nd Gen Shuffle is only used for audio podcast. (Poor audio quality)
Don't like carrying large devices anymore. (20GB iPod Photo stays home)

So I guess I should replace my 2nd Gen Shuffle with a 4GB or 8GB nano. There were times when I wanted to surf the songs on the Shuffle but was stuck with just clicking "next" in the playlist. A NEW nano should ease my craving for a new device until next summer. then I'll make my decision on the "big guns", iPod Touch, 80-160GB Classic, oh what the hell.....maybe even a Zune80 which ain't looking too bad at this point!

Collapse -
Zune?
by JonTitor / October 27, 2007 4:15 PM PDT

why would you get a Zune when you have your music on iTunes?

Collapse -
I second that. MS and Apple aren't exactly
by BeatleMegaFan / October 28, 2007 1:25 AM PDT
In reply to: Zune?

the best of friends mind you, even though Apple has tried to marry MS with Boot Camp LOL. Trust me, it is very possible to unlock all of your iTMS purchases and stick them on something else, but why go to all the trouble and waste time? Then you'd have to subscribe to the Zune marketplace thing and you'd still have an iTMS account.

Trouble? Stay away from the Zune unless you love to mess around with stuff for no reason.
-BMF

Collapse -
iTunes purchased tracks
by Dred242 / October 28, 2007 3:46 AM PDT
In reply to: Zune?

The majority of my music is non-iTunes purchased tracks, so switching to a non-Apple player is no big deal to me. I just looked at my total purchased track in iTunes and I have 655 purchased tracks (both singles and albums). That represents about 8%-9% of my music. Removing Apples DRM is child's play for so few tracks.

I built up my collection of music through ripping CD,s and buying tracks and albums from eMusic (mostly Jazz) several years ago when it was all-you-can-eat with no download limit for about $14mo. Good times man....good times!

What I like about the Zune:
* Just like the iPod Classic, 80GB for $249.
* A big-*** screen!
* 1st Gen audio and video quality was outstanding! I'm sure the Zune80 will be as good.

What I might hate about the Zune:
* The desktop application kind of sucks!
* I can't find anyone who owns a Zune, so who the hell would I squirt songs too?
* WiFi sync of songs and video is said to be slow.
* Sync of recorded TV shows with Windows Media Center requires a PC running Windows Vista Home Premium or Windows Vista Ultimate (read the fine print: http://tinyurl.com/2emrww).
* It's a Zune....ha ha!

Collapse -
(NT) Still, iPod means no hassle and no problem!
by BeatleMegaFan / October 28, 2007 5:38 AM PDT
Collapse -
it greatly depends on how much music/videos u have
by smoss74 / January 9, 2008 8:08 AM PST

How much space do you think you would use? If you use less than 8 GB with music and videos added together, then get the Ipod nano. Its pretty cool,and thin.

If you have more than 8GB get the Classic. I personally have the Classic (I have over 30GB of music). It's great. Just make sure you update to version 1.0.3 so that the Ipod is as responsive as possible (HD based Ipods r usually slower than flash ones), but with 1.0.3, the Classic comes pretty close to the Nano's speed. Otherwise the Classic is great!

Collapse -
it depends on the # of music/videos you have big time
by lisa.s.25 / January 9, 2008 10:16 AM PST

You are totally right smoss74, im looking into getting a new ipod or possibly zune and ive already decided that it has to be 80gb. I have TONS of songs, i have all mine plus my cousin gave me a portable harddrive with music on it that if you listen to it straight through without stopping theres over a years worth of music on it. Plus he said if i get an ipod that plays movies hes going to give me a portable harddrive full of full length movies cause at the moment hes working on transfering them to the file format that works with ipods for his ipod. So one of the first things you want to do when getting a new ipod or any mp3 player is decide how much storage space you need.

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Help 49,613 discussions
icon
Computer Newbies 10,349 discussions
icon
Laptops 19,436 discussions
icon
Security 30,426 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 20,308 discussions
icon
Windows 10 360 discussions
icon
Phones 15,802 discussions
icon
Windows 7 7,351 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 14,641 discussions

Smartphone tip

Hoarding photos on your phone?

Those picture are hogging memory and could be slowing down your phone.