Apple iPod classic 160 GB Black (7th Generation)

• 160 GB capacity for 40,000 songs, 25,000 photos, or 200 hours of video
• Up to 36 hours of music playback or 6 hours of video playback when fully charged
• 2.5-inch color LCD with LED backlight and 320 x 240 pixel resolution
• Supports AAC, Protected AAC, MP3, MP3 VBR, Audible, Apple Lossless, AIFF, and WAV audio formats
• Highly recyclable aluminum and stainless steel enclosure
• 2.5-inch LED-backlit display(Release date: 8/16/2012)
• 1-Year Limited Warranty
• 320 x 240 pixel resolution

The new 160GB iPod Classic is easily Apple Inc.'s best iPod to date, and out of all of the iPods that I own, this is my favorite.

First, the capacity of this iPod is simply unbeatable. I've yet to see another portable media player that can match the iPod Classic in capacity. I have a huge music library, and it's nice to be able to carry every song that I own on my person at all times. What's more, thanks to the iPod Classic's capacity, I also have room to carry a few videos with me, and some of my photos. If you don't like having to pick which songs to load onto your portable media player, the iPod Classic is the way to go.

The second thing that I love about this iPod can be summed up in two words: it works. The 160GB iPod Classic that was introduced in 2007 was extremely buggy, had a non-responsive Clickwheel on many units, crashed frequently, and required a hit-and-miss firmware update to stop the hard drive from spinning even when the device was "off," which often lead to dead batteries. All of these problems left the 2007 160GB iPod Classic warming shelves and earning it the infamous "honor" of being the "worst selling iPod ever," according to Apple. I'm pleased to say that the new 160GB iPod Classic released earlier this month has virtually none of these problems. There's no "spinning hard drive bug," the Clickwheel is incredibly responsive, and the device isn't crash-prone. While it's true that many of these issues were fixed with last year's iPod Classic, there hasn't been a truly functional 160GB model until now. To put it bluntly, this is the iPod that Apple should've released in 2007.

Another thing that I really like about this iPod, and the iPod Classic in general, is it's ability to double as an external hard drive. While I believe that the iPod Nano is also capable of this, the only iPod that really has enough space to function as an external hard drive is the iPod Classic. The hard drive functionality admittedly reduces the number of devices I have to carry on me at any given time. If you regularly work with large files and are considering a new iPod, the iPod Classic is the way to go, plain and simple.

So what are the caveats? Well for starters, as with every other iPod Classic, this is a hard-drive (rather than flash-memory) based device. As a result, it has moving parts which make it unsuitable for running or any physical activity that exerts mechanical shock onto the iPod. Unless you exercise constantly with your iPod though, this really shouldn't be an issue. The only other caveat, which is more of personal taste than an actual flaw, that I can find, is that Apple has not made any cosmetic changes to this device since they introduced it in 2007. Now don't get me wrong, the point of an iPod "Classic," is to retain the "Classic" design, but after seeing how much better a black Clickwheel looks on the silver iPod Nano, I'd have thought that Apple would have given the silver iPod Classic a black Clickwheel as well. However, I admit that this is entirely my personal preference and not a "flaw" per se. I've put a quick list of pros and cons together, which can be seen below:

Pros: Largest iPod Capacity-wise, long battery life, "Genius" feature, excellent value for your money, well-built, doubles as an external hard drive, and improvements to Cover Flow.

Cons: Hard Drive (rather than Flash memory) based storage medium; device is cosmetically identical to the 2007 80GB model. (I still don't understand why Apple hasn't colored the Clickwheel black on the silver model to match the iPod Nano.)

Finally, I would highly recommend this product, which is why it gets five stars from me. I don't like the iPod Nano; it's too small for my hands, and the screen is too small for my eyes. While the iPod Touch may have app store access and Wi-Fi, I find it to be a really gimmicky device, that makes for a poor portable media player, (Apple was wise to position it as a handheld game system,) and is really an "iPhone without a phone." In contrast, the iPod Classic is an excellent portable media player, it has an excellent interface, and it only costs $249 dollars. To put things in perspective, the 2009 160GB iPod Classic costs $70 dollars more than a 16GB iPod Nano, and $150 dollars less than a 64GB iPod Touch. All in all, I highly recommend this product.

Buy Apple iPod classic 160 GB Black (7th Generation) Now

This is the second iPod I own. The first one was a 30 Mb 5th Generation Ipod Video.

First, the plus.

There are many improvements in the 7th generation comparing it to the 5th, although I think most of them were introduced with the 6th Gen. The whole Cover Flow/Genius capabilities are definetly an improvement to the previous software. The games are a nice bonus. I've only had it for three days, but I can already see that I like the new interface a lot more.

And the disk space, I mean, WOW! The ipod is basically the same size as my 30 Gb one, but it's capacity is over 5 times bigger. I am an avid music fan, have tons of music, and my musical taste ranges from ambient to heavy metal, but I think it's going to be a long time before I fill this one up. I think this is the best feature of this iPod, and by itself, the reason you should buy it.

There are also video capabilities, which have always been a plus, and some other stuff, but I didn't see a major difference from the previous versions.

But then, why did I give it 4 stars? I wanted 4.5 stars, but Amazon doesn't let me do that.

Here are the cons.

First, as previous reviewers have stated, the sound quality seems to have downgraded from the 5th Gen iPod. The sound lacks depth, the songs sound more flat. I don't mean to say that the sound is bad, because it still has a very good sound, and I've tested it with headphones, computer speakers and my car stereo. I'm just saying that the 5th Generation iPod sounds better, and the difference is quite noticeable.

The other thing, which might be just my iPod, because I didn't see other reviewers mentioning it, is that the click wheel seems to be less sensitive/responsive than the 5th Generation one. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it is annoying sometimes that you try so select a song or an option on the menu and the wheel doesn't respond right away.

There's also the fact that using Cover Flow seems to make the iPod proccess slower, but then again, loading the covers of literally thousands of records is not a quick task, and you can always not use Cover Flow, so I won't hold this against the iPod.

To sum it all up. If you have a lot of music and want to carry it all with you; if 30, 60, 80 or 120 Gb is just not enough; if this is your first iPod purchase, or if you just really, really like the new interface and games (I know I did), then I highly reccomend it, and you won't be dissapointed. To me this is definetly the best music player on the market. You will need to sit down and learn how to use iTunes, but when you do, you're just going to love this little gadget.

However, if you have a 5th generation iPod that's working just fine, and you prefer sound quality to disk space, you might not want to buy this one. Just try to be more more picky with the songs you put on it, I guess.

Read Best Reviews of Apple iPod classic 160 GB Black (7th Generation) Here

I am quite new to the portable mp3 world, although I have about 250 gb of music on my computer. The only mp3 player I own is a 1 gb Samsung Pebble, which I use at the gym. This was the only mp3 player I thought I needed since both of the stereos in my vehicles have mp3 disc players. But then I started thinking...since my new Camry has an auxilary jack to hook up an mp3 device, wouldn't it be great to have one and get rid of those giant cd wallets?! The first task was to get permission from my wife to spend 250 bucks. After a little hesitation, she agreed. And then it was on to the research. Since I have such a large collection of music, the capacity of the device was number one on my list (as well as positive reviews & quality). I was pleasantly surprised to see that Apple had reissued the Classic in 160 gb form instead of the 120 gb. So after much personal debate between the Zune and the new 160 gb iPod Classic, the iPod won out.

Although the iPod is a fantastic little device with a large capacity, the software is not without its troubles. I downloaded the most current version of iTunes (verison 9) and immediately began importing my mp3 files from my hard drive. This process can take some time, but not much longer than any other media player. I was so excited to finally have the majority of my music all on one device; and have the cover art as well (I just think that is awesome)! After loading a large chunk of my files into iTunes, I noticed that only a handful of the albums had the cover art. I attempted using the "get cover art" function, but it didn't work. My only option was to track down the cover art online, right click, save, and then add the picture to the album file in iTunes. I know that it's not such a huge deal, but when you're dealing with A LOT of music, it can become quite a pain & time consuming. I later learned that the files have to be spelled exactly like they are in iTunes. And if they didn't come from iTunes in the first place, 9 times out of 10, the album art won't come up anyway. I would like to see a function that gets the cover art from other online sources, not just iTunes; and without a strict spelling criteria. There's no reason that the way I name my "The" bands should restrict the retrieval of cover art. An example being "Animals, The" instead of "The Animals."

So other than the minor annoyance with the cover art, the player itself is fantastic. I found the interface very user-friendly and intuitive, without much of a learning curve. Again, I am new to the world of iPod, but I can honestly say that I am very pleased. I wanted to write a review for people that have a large digital music collection that came mostly from ripping cd's to their computers. I am one of the people who still enjoy listening to an entire album, and is not satisfied by just downloading the single, so I still buy physical cd's & collect vinyl. I would definitely recommend the 160 gb iPod to any music fan with a large collection. Just remember to be patient when getting the artwork for all of those older albums. If you don't have a collection full of Taylor Swift, the Jonas Brothers, or Beyonce, iTunes just may not recognize your music!

Want Apple iPod classic 160 GB Black (7th Generation) Discount?

I love the iPod but this has been a huge disappointment. The hard drive is really noisy when it changes songs, and it did not remember where it was paused in a couple of audiobooks. I assumed this was a defective one and got a new one. Amazon customer service is impeccable!

The second iPod has a less noisy hard drive, but it reset itself for no reason in the middle of a song and then when I tried to re-sync it would not connect to iTunes. Once it finally connected, iTunes says that there is no music on the iPod and that it cannot be synched/recognized. This was after 1 day of use where it was not dropped or mistreated and never left the house. My 5th generation iPod, 3rd generation and shuffle synchronized just fine, so it's not iTunes or my Mac.

Also, I would say the music quality is not as good as the 5th generation with video. It lacks depth on the new Classic. The size of the device and the hard drive capacity is fantastic and I really like the ability to use the genius function. I even like the slightly odd split screen. I will probably try again with another one, but this is really disappointing. My first bad experience with many years of Apple products.

Save 8% off

I have mixed feelings about the new iPod Classic. As with all iPods, it's an elegant, easy to use device that does exactly what it sets out to do. The interface is intuitive, the device is attractive, and the ergonomic design remains the best on the market.

So why do I have mixed feelings? Some changes to the interface and general workings make no sense to me. The split-screen menu, for instance, is a pointless bells&whistles addition that only serves to clutter up menus that were once streamlined. Also, when the unit goes idle the screen displays the clock instead of the artist & song playing -not very handy when you're shuffling a library of new tunes. And finally, I'm not sure if it's the new version of iTunes or the unit itself, but half my album covers don't want to display anymore. The first two gripes (and make no mistake, they're only minor gripes, not deal-breakers) could EASILY be rectified with an option to adjust the settings ... but Apple thought better of giving the user more options.

HOWEVER!

The unit itself remains an iPod through and through. It's my fourth, so needless to say I like the product. This one is slimmer than the 60GB I just got rid of, nice and light so it's not a burden in your pocket, and feels much sturdier than my nano. The new Classic has a pretty loud hard drive that may concern a new user, but in reading up on the unit that appears normal. Feels like a well-made product.

The capacity is, of course, to die for. The 160GB this offers will be more than enough for most users, and for power users like me it's the best option available to us as far as capacity goes. It also doubles as a USB hard drive, so you can use it for data storage, too. Nice. The video playback looks great, a larger screen is a great way to store and show photos, and it even has support for a selection of decent little video games.

Maybe best of all is the "Genius" feature. Like Pandora radio and other such services, you play a song and it will queue up other songs from your collection that fit in with the sound/genre/whatever. Really great feature when you have 160GB of music to play with.

So misgivings aside, I really enjoy the iPod Classic. Best capacity on the market coupled with that elegant iPod interface makes this a winner.

Read More >>

Apple iPod nano 16GB (Pink)

• Design: About the size of a credit card, the iPod nano is just 0.24" (5.4mm) thin. The 2.5" Multi-Touch display is nearly twice the size of the display on the previous iPod nano, so you can see more of the music, photos and videos you have
• Music: Tap to play your favorite songs, entire albums or everything by one artist. You can even browse by genres or composers. Flip through your music by album art. To keep things fresh, give the iPod nano a shake and it shuffles to a different song in your music library
• Video: Now you can watch episodes of your favorite TV shows, Hollywood blockbusters, free video podcasts and home videos on your iPod nano. View them on the widescreen 2.5-inch Multi-Touch display. Tap to play, fast-forward, rewind and pause
• Bluetooth 4.0: Pairing iPod nano with Bluetooth-enabled headphones and supported speakers is a cinch. With no wires in the way, connecting to Bluetooth devices is hassle free
• Radio: FM radio keeps you up on what's going on out there, whether it's the game, the top news stories or your favorite talk shows. Just plug in your headphones and tap to see the controls. Flick the radio dial to change stations

The latest iPod Nano is an update to the current state of the art in ultra-compact music players and it represents incremental but important improvements over its predecessors with only a few minor trade-offs. I'm convinced it represents a substantial functional upgrade for most users.

Its major advantage, in my opinion, is actually its slightly-larger size in comparison to the 5th generation. Although the smaller form factor of the previous Nano was remarkable for its extreme compactness, it actually made the device somewhat cumbersome to use. Its touch-screen was too susceptible to unintended inputs and it couldn't be easily held in one hand while manipulating its controls. Attempts to control it via screen-input while clipped onto one's clothing tended to be futile: you'd need to un-clip the device, then hold it in one hand and manipulate its touch-screen with the other. While the tiny size and convenient clip made it practically disappear while in use, it could be an ergonomic nightmare to actually interact with.

The new Nano is still tiny but much better for one-handed use. My index finger comfortably sits on the three-way volume/play/pause button (itself a major improvement) while my thumb has easy access to the sleep/wake button, the home button and the improved, larger, multi-touch-enabled screen. This easy one-handed control has the significant practical advantage of not requiring the interruption of my activities to switch, for example, between podcasts, music playlists and FM radio.

Other improvements follow logically from the Nano's new shape. The screen's larger proportions allow all the main "apps" to show up on a single home screen, so less fiddling is typically required for switching. Videos and photos become practical on a screen of these proportions, so it's perfectly reasonable to load some viewable content in addition to the audio content that will no doubt remain the Nano's main reason for existence. With few pixels, photos take up very little memory. The screen has neither the stunning colors nor the retina resolution of the premium iDevices, but photos still show up crisply and become the modern equivalent of the now-obsolete "wallet"-sized photos people used to carry. Video content is surprisingly usable as long as you can set the Nano in a viewable position for example, on a cardio machine at the gym. The Nano supports rotation, so displaying the beautiful panos you've made with your new iPhone is simply a matter of rotating the device to the horizontal and then looking very, very closely. Maybe bring a magnifying glass.

More important for most people, the new Nano is an improved device for playing music. The "Home" button is a good antidote to the common experience of getting lost in the old Nano's sometimes-inscrutable layers of touch screens, bringing you immediately back to the home screen without interfering with playback. An even bigger practical improvement is the addition of the play/pause button on the volume control, a feature lifted from the (now unfortunately absent) remote-equipped earphones of many previous iPods. It's worth a few minutes' time to familiarize yourself with this button's very clever functions: click to play or to pause, double-click for next track, triple-click for previous track (even when in shuffle mode), double-click-and-hold for cueing (great for skipping forward in podcasts), and so on. Most routine playback functions are accessible through this simple and very welcome interface and can be accomplished while diverting little attention from whatever you're otherwise engaged in.

The list of major upgrades doesn't end there. The inclusion of Bluetooth will make the Nano usable, for the first time, with many car audio systems and also with wireless Bluetooth headsets and remote Bluetooth speaker systems. The FM radio is much better than I would have imagined if I hadn't used the previous Nano, with legitimately excellent reception and a very nice interface that lets you select unlimited numbers of "presets." I've used small portable radios in the past, and maybe there are some other good ones out there, but the ones I've experienced have been terrible. I'm personally still attached to FM, and this level of FM quality would make the Nano a terrific device even if it did nothing else.

In general I find the new Nano to be a beautiful, nearly-flawless little piece of practical technology that can do things which, not that long ago, I would not have expected to be possible within my lifetime. While it's not inexpensive, it has real life-improving potential for people who love music or who want to remain portably connected to a world of podcasted information. Being smaller than a credit card in two of three dimensions, it fits easily into the smallest pocket. While jaded consumers of technology can claim it's a mere incremental improvement over its predecessors, I prefer to see it as an instance of exceptional, practical, functional design in a world full of cheap junk that too often disappoints or fails to function altogether. While I have a few nitpicks (below), none of them significantly diminish its overall excellence. It earns every star.

Notes:

There are a few disappointments and drawbacks:

--The Ear Pods that come with the device sound good overall but don't have the remote function included with many iDevice earphones in recent years. While the new Nano has a hardware button that mimics that function, the corded remote is often more accessible, making pause/play and track-change functions instantly available even if the device is buried in a pocket. A decent set of Apple-compatible remote-equipped earphones would be a nice addition.

--This latest Nano eliminates the useful integrated clip featured by the last (6th generation) Nano, making it more a pocket device. Its thin-ness and Bluetooth support compensates for this: the old Nano's clip made it slightly cumbersome in a pocket, as it could catch on things and added significantly to the device's thickness. Nevertheless the previous generation remains the ultimate for portability and, while thicker and slightly wider, weighs around 1/3 less than the latest model.

--The white screen-surround on the colored Nanos doesn't look all that great in my opinion. It does give the Nanos a clean, friendly look, but to my eyes black would be a better choice and would contrast sharply with the bright colors and icons. I chose the boring but still attractive "slate" (black) model, which does have a black screen-surround.

--I would like more flexibility in some of the settings: for example, the ability to keep the screen "on" longer, even indefinitely, before it sleeps. As it is, the screen goes dark so quickly I'm often still in the middle of fiddling with whatever I'm working on and have to re-wake the screen to continue. The previous-generation Nano was similar.

--The previous 6th-gen Nano enjoyed an unintended popularity as a watch, mainly with kids, who seemed to love using it for this purpose. It had lots of clock faces to choose from and could be set to default to the clock when waked from sleep (as can the current model). The new Nano gives up the prospect of practical wrist-wearability. It also features fewer clock faces and only a few background options, all color-matched to the device, none of which is customizable. Perhaps this helps contribute to a lean OS and optimize the device's storage space. Whatever the case, the new Nano is not a watch, nor a clock, although it will accurately show you the time and it still has a useful stopwatch and countdown-timer.

The Lightning connector is functionally far better than competing connector types such as Micro-USB and a clear improvement over the old style. The previous-generation Nano was nearly dwarfed by its connector, and it's easy to see that retaining that oversized monstrosity (as it will seem to have been, within a year or two) would have precluded the current positioning of the Home button on the new device, among other drawbacks.

The Nano is still not an iOS device: internet connectivity and wirelessor Cloud-syncing remain in the future. This makes sense: a Nano is likely to be away from a wifi signal much of the time it's used, and cellular capability hardly seems reasonable. If you're looking for a do-it-all device, a smart phone remains a much more versatile (but cumbersome) alternative. The Nano is fundamentally optimized to function as a stand-alone audio player. Pandora will have to wait.

Why not simply use a smart phone for music playback and podcasts? Well, you could but the Nano has some significant advantages. Its size makes it much easier to carry while active, or while working around the house or in the garage. Its dedicated intelligent play/pause button makes interfacing with audio playback much simpler. And at least among Apple devices it is the only one to offer FM radio, which it does very well. These tend to be very important differences in day-to-day use and can easily justify its purchase price as a separate device.

Buy Apple iPod nano 16GB (Pink) Now

Other reviews did a good job describing other features which work super well, so I will only cover the Nike Fitness and Bluetooth to avoid redundancy.

Pros: This nano has all required Nike Fitness components in one unit. No more need for pods on or in your shoes. Yes it even works on a treadmill and tracks Very accurately. Starting out the Nike Fitness, You can select a run by distance, time, or calorie count. During your run, it pauses the music and with a sweet sounding easily understood friendly female voice, gives you a quick update on your distance, then continues to play your playlist. This I found very cool. If you press the top sleep button while running with Nike fitness, it gives you the time, distance and current pace. I tracked this feature and compared it with my Garmin GPS watch and they tracked fairly well out of the box and only improved with multiple calibrations after I completed my run. The more you calibrate it, the more it learns and gets closer to accurate.

Cons:

1)There is one Huge Fail however. The manual suggests placing it at your waist to use the Nike Fitness. Most runners are waiting for a quality workable armband which I believe would compromise this feature based on the how it works. I will test it on my next run. It seems that the Apple engineers aren't runners. This I believe may be a fail for this feature since it is geared toward runners and runners infrequently wear their ipod at their waist, especially because this Nano lacks a clip. I, however, placed my iPod in my Spi-belt which is a small flexible runner's pouch wrapping around the waist. It is a tiny fanny pack for keys, ipods and such. Remember though, it needs to be at your waist, so finding that button while running when it is enclosed in a pocket proves challenging as well.

2)My other concern is that Bluetooth connected to a stereo headset wouldn't work when it is at the waist. Most reviewers and user manuals of higher end sport stereo Bluetooth headphones state that they were required to place their Bluetooth player on their sleeve in order to get uninterrupted playback. My question to the engineers is-since the iPod cannot be at the waist and sleeve simultaneously will i be able to wear a stereo Bluetooth headset and use Nike Fitness at the same time? I would love to get into the minds of the engineers on this one.

I was also successful with Bluetooth connection with my car. It works, but some features are lost compared to when I sync it directly to the radio via USB. With Bluetooth, I no longer can use my voice activated song or artist request which Ford vehicle SYNC systems have. I would instead have to search on my iPod for my favorite song while driving. That isn't a safe option, therefore not making Bluetooth syncing with my car stereo desirable for me. Also, tag information isn't displayed on my car's stereo while using Bluetooth. Perhaps, a car other than Ford has these features.

I am curious about the Bluetooth connectivity with stereo headsets while running. If anyone has success with this feature and where you placed their iPod to maintain connectivity, and quality of sound reply to this thread.

Read Best Reviews of Apple iPod nano 16GB (Pink) Here

My new nano arrived with FedEx yesterday after a long grueling trip from China. This is my first new nano since my 2nd Generation unit -which has a lot of miles on it and which still works great. The reason I purchased this one was because I know the clock's ticking on "old reliable". Candidly, I checked out generation numbers 3 through 6 as they were released and dismissed them all for a variety of reasons. I had hopes that this one would make the necessary change fairly painless. I've only had it for a day so, for the most part, the jury's still out. First, though, let me say that I use my nano mostly for working out. It would seem that Apple has finally admitted that most nanos are bought exactly for that specific purpose. Let the iPod Touch have all the bells and whistles for those who want them. Keep the nano task-oriented!

So far, I'm most impressed with the new earphones. They fit very well and I suspect I'll have no problem jogging with them in place. I'm concerned, however, that they're going to let in a lot of ambient gym noise as they don't fit snuggly. I do like the sound quality though.

The radio also impresses me. It works well and my favorite stations come in clear as a bell.

The new nano also supports videos. I can't address that feature because I know I'm unlikely to use it. (Who wants to watch a video on a 2.25" screen?)

The unit is light (perhaps too light), thin and attractive. It's surprisingly "slippery" to hold, however.

My biggest issue: There's almost nothing you can do with it that doesn't require both hands. Hence, the title to my review. Note to Apple: Go back to the 2nd generation unit, enhance its storage capacity, and give us back our click wheel. High quality, one-handed music is what this niche market really wants!

Want Apple iPod nano 16GB (Pink) Discount?

Update 1/5/2013: I mostly use my SanDisk Sansa Clip Zip MP3 Player instead of this Nano (it has a memory card slot), it's not as fancy but it's easier to use/navigate.

First off, you don't need more then one hand to do anything on it (maybe I just have small hands?), although, the 6th generation one was much easier to use with one hand.

Pros:

They finally put a pause/play button as an external button

the layout for skimming/skipping through a song has been made easier or switching to shuffle...

I find the earphones to be much better then the old ones but I personally use V-MODA Crossfade LP Over-Ear Noise-Isolating Metal Headphone (White Pearl) or my bose ear phones

the time is displayed on the song screen! and no more clip (i never used it)

Cons:

It's slippery

I think the button below (on) the screen surface is pointless, it just makes the ipod bigger and doesn't add much value.

The external volume control buttons barely protrude out making it more difficult to feel (b/c of the way I hold it) and you might click the play/pause button instead

Also, the buttons (volume control and play/pause) are on the side of the nano and not on the top of it like on the 6th generation so while holding onto the ipod you might click one of them accidentally (it keeps happening to me), this will take some getting used.

Video is a waste of a feature in my opinion... and they had to create a new type of usb cord (i can no longer borrow from friends/family)

Other then that, it's no different then the 6th gen nano (obviously the size/dimensions are different) and so far i prefer my 6th gen but I've only had this one for a day. I'd give it 3.5 stars as I expected more from the seventh generation nano...

Save 7% off

Just picked up the new 7th Generation Nano last night and I am impressed by the engineering and design that went into it. Upon unboxing I noted that the unit was exceptionally thin with a nice feel to it. The user interface is Apple easy (as is usually the case with Apple) and I was able to get it up and running in a few minutes. I did note that no charger is included with the Nano but the Lightning connector does have a USB plug which works fine in my existing charger blocks. The unit came with the new earbuds which fit a bit better than the older style but they still won't likely fit snug enough to jog around the neighborhood without falling out. The color screen is larger than my pervious 5th Generation Nano and does a good job of displaying the pictures and movies I have stored on it. Moving through screens is simple once you understand that it uses the same swipe and pinch technique as my iPhone the volume, on/off and sleep functions are similar to the iPhone as well and will make the learning curve on this new Nano fairly quick. The FM radio is much improved in sensitivity than my older Nano and does a good job of pulling in weaker stations and the sound is quite good. All in all, a nice addition to the Apply family of portable music players.

Read More >>