Touch ones look pretty good, a bit too pricy for so little space. As for the nano and classic, they look terrible.
hurray with the touch screen - btw did it really matter if the ipod had a touchscreen or not ? or do they have some new features on the touch ?
I find having a video ipod nano would be pretty pointless b/c why would anyone want to watch something on such a small screen (not good for your eyes), and has anyone ever filled their ipod completely full of songs? And would you actually put videos on your ipod and watch it?...and at the end would this really be worth it?...
Those of you who are planning on buying the iPod Classic, hold your horses. At the moment, the DAC (Digital to Analogue Converter) that's built into the Classic is unknown BUT the previous versions of the iPod (generation 4, 5 and 5.5) have the Wolfson DAC chip built in. These DAC chips are one of the best chips out in the market. What's so special about the DAC chip? Sound quality. EDIT: I just read a review and the 6th generation iPod (the classic) does not come with the Wolfson DAC, however the signal path is much shorter. They will run some tests and I'll have the results posted here.
after maverick's pic, i think the ipod touch looks sexy as hell kinda of how a iphone nano should look like...too bad ain't gettin' one anytime soon though lols
Okay, while I'm not really an Apple fan, that ipod touch looks pretty cool, while on the other hand, that new nano looks like it ate a bit to much and got a bit too fat.
they come with their own background wallpapers...cool hehe - can you even change that 2 hav ur own? they look pretty gd though, bt stil wd stick 2 the original classic 1...
ouch....just bought my 30gb ipod last year.......now....really regretting it......why didnt i wait for another year T.T
