iPod Nano 8 GB vs. Apple 30 GB iPod with Video Playback Black (5th Generation)
597497
Nano and Shuffle use solid-state memory. These are more forgiving than a hard-drive mechanical drive on 30Gig and higher devices. You will need to be more careful with hard-drive memory devices, and they are bigger and heavier....plus more memory than you will ever use for music.
395994
I had a nano 2nd generation until recently when I upgraded to the classic 120. The nano and I had good times and I consireded keeping it for the gym and what not. BUt I love my music so much and my taste varies from hour to hour that I would rather keep the classic with me at all times with my entire music collection and create several playlists within it than keep my nano and not have everything I want at any given moment. So the nano will be inherited by my mom this Christmas. Yep, thats right, some seriously early "Christmas shopping" ;-)
998032
You might want to try the shuffle if you don't have a lot of music (it's 1 gigabyte, 240 songs for $79) or the nano (4 gigabytes, 1000 songs for $149, 8 gigabytes, 2000 songs for $199) if you don't want to pay 300 or 400 dollars for the iPod touch.
1634247
I bought a back plate about a few months ago. I have a 32gb ipod however I received an 8gb back cover. It fit perfectly with no difference between an actual 32gb back and the 8gb back;so if function is your desire then don't worry but if it is looks you may have to speak to the seller and specifically ask for one with the 8gb marking to be certain.
249319
I bought a 4GB Nano 2 years ago because I only had 3GBs of music. Now I have 16GBs. Getting an iPod may give you the bug to listen to more music. With the ease of switching between songs and creating playlists, any mp3 player will drive you to experiment a little with your music taste. I also could not have cared less about the pictures or video (still don't) - but I got really into podcasts, and those take up space (if you like radio, check out podcasts - better quality, fewer interruptions). Bottom line - you will probably regret not spending the extra $50. The 80GB is a little more delicate than the nano (spinning hard drive vs. flash memory), but if you are just going to keep it at home it should not be an issue.
137819
i dont know my exact model, but i have 5th generation 30gb ipod video, and it works great
509352
found the following....site link at bottom5.0 GenerationMA146LL/A (30GB black)MA002LL/A (30GB white) 5.5 GenerationMA444LL/A (30GB white) MA446LL/A (30GB black)found at this site:http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/faqs/answers/what-are-the-differences-between-all-the-ipod-models/
366566
I have about 23gb in music, and closing in on 100gb in movies. I have the 80gb Video iPod. If you're like me, you're gonna wanna wait for at least the 128gb iPod
1540252
I can't say. THe one I did have I only had it for a year and it started going out on me. After awhile I saved up and got myself a iPod Classic in black. I have used this everyday for almost 3 years and it's working alot better then my Sony ever did. For me the iPod is alot better then the Sony ever was for my needs. Thanks but I wouldn't recamend this to anyone after the problems I went though
583036
J.B.An hour-long TV show typically takes up 200 MB. I download shows (such as CSI and Monk) regularly from Apple's iTunes Music Store. I have the 30 GB player, but kind of regret not getting the 60 GB. I currently have about 22 hours of video content and about 580 songs on my iPod. Between the videos and music, I've used up about 10 GB (1/3) of space and I have yet to upload the bulk of my music collection.With all that being said, if you are budget conscious, you can still make do with a 30 GB model -- as long as you rotate your video content out of the player, which is easy enough with iTunes. Whichever model you decide, I hope you'll enjoy the iPod. I certainly wished I'd had purchased mine sooner! J.B.An hour-long TV show typically takes up 200 MB. I download shows (such as CSI and Monk) regularly from Apple's iTunes Music Store. I have the 30 GB player, but kind of regret not getting the 60 GB. I currently have about 22 hours of video content and about 580 songs on my iPod. Between the videos and music, I've used up about 10 GB (1/3) of space and I have yet to upload the bulk of my music collection.With all that being said, if you are budget conscious, you can still make do with a 30 GB model -- as long as you rotate your video content out of the... » Read More J.B.An hour-long TV show typically takes up 200 MB. I download shows (such as CSI and Monk) regularly from Apple's iTunes Music Store. I have the 30 GB player, but kind of regret not getting the 60 GB. I currently have about 22 hours of video content and about 580 songs on my iPod. Between the videos and music, I've used up about 10 GB (1/3) of space and I have yet to upload the bulk of my music collection.With all that being said, if you are budget conscious, you can still make do with a 30 GB model -- as long as you rotate your video content out of the player, which is easy enough with iTunes. Whichever model you decide, I hope you'll enjoy the iPod. I certainly wished I'd had purchased mine sooner! « Show Less
1447614
Yes it is. I am very happy with my iPod Nano. Sounds good and works great. I bought two of them and recorded my CD collection to iTunes and uploaded to the iPod. Worked great with no problems. I bought the iPod after I spent hours trying to get a Sensa Clip+ to same thing and have never been able to get it to work.
1041507
Thank you for the information. Since the 32 gb is only $50 more, it would make more sense to me to go with that one and then I can add whatever music I want, whenever I want and whatever genres I want and have an incredible personal jukebox. But I'll keep in mind what you said and I can always change my mind and drop down to the 16 gb. And no, I don't care about the video. If the 16 gb does not have the video function, that might be the way I would go then. Why don't these places just make music players at a less expensive price for those customers who don't want every electronic function that is available at the higher prices? Thank you for the information. Since the 32 gb is only $50 more, it would make more sense to me to go with that one and then I can add whatever music I want, whenever I want and whatever genres I want and have an incredible personal jukebox. But I'll keep in mind what you said and I can always change my mind and drop down to the 16 gb. And no, I don't care about the video. If the 16 gb does not have the video function, that might be the way I would go then. Why don't these places just make music players at a less expensive price for those customers who don't want every electronic function... » Read More Thank you for the information. Since the 32 gb is only $50 more, it would make more sense to me to go with that one and then I can add whatever music I want, whenever I want and whatever genres I want and have an incredible personal jukebox. But I'll keep in mind what you said and I can always change my mind and drop down to the 16 gb. And no, I don't care about the video. If the 16 gb does not have the video function, that might be the way I would go then. Why don't these places just make music players at a less expensive price for those customers who don't want every electronic function that is available at the higher prices? « Show Less
998033
I would say the iPod classics. They have 160 GB of capacity and are only $249.00. It doesn't have a touch screen or anything fancy but it does hold up to 40,000 songs so if you want it to hold only music it can do a lot. You can watch videos and view photos on it too if you want, too. It has great sound quality, too. Here's a link. http://www.apple.com/ipodclassic/ Hope this helps!
1073315
Harvey from what I could find it looks like the two are the same size so I don't think you would have any real problem. There will be the small hole in the back where the camera is on the 4th generation. I read the reviews complaining about the belt clip and decided just to take it off, but that is your decision and not what you asked about. Plus if you take the belt clip off the case and the iPod can easily fit in your pocket :) Here is the link where I found the information and I cut and pasted their comparison. http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/ipod/ipod-faq/differences-between-4th-gen-ipod-touch-3rd-gen-ipod-touch.html External Differences The first most noticeable difference between the iPod touch 3rd Gen and 4th Gen -- at least if the devices are side-by-side -- is that both lines have a multi-touch capable 3.5" display, but the 4th Gen devices have a much higher-resolution 960x640 (326 ppi) "Retina" display compared to a 320x480 (163 ppi) display in the model replaced. Second, one likely would notice that the iPod touch 4th Gen has two cameras -- a front-mounted camera designed to be used for video conferencing in conjunction with Apple's provided "FaceTime" software over a Wi-Fi network (it takes VGA quality photos and video up to 30 FPS) and a rear-mounted camera which supports HD video recording (720p up to 30 FPS with audio), and can take 960x720 still photos (roughly 0.7 megapixels). The iPod touch 3rd Gen, by contrast, has no cameras at all.
951340
No, my iPod usually gets 3.5 or 4 hours of battery life at the most, and thats just playing straight music, not switching around between songs or playing the games or anything. Its my only real complaint about the iPod video.
650962
I absolutely agree with the OP.This is the most advanced MP3 player on the planet, and to ship it with 16GB Flash instead of an 80 or 160GB microdrive, like the classic has, was stupid IMHO.It would have also been considerably cheaper with a 160GB drive instead of 16GB of Flash.I have a 2nd Gen iPod and a 1st gen 4GB Nano, both still in perfect condition. The Touch was to be my next purchase, but now I'm just not so sure any more.To be totally honest, the 160GB iPod Classic is a FAR better buy. It's cheaper, has 10 times the storage, has the same new interface and OS, and lasts 40 hours per charge.Apple has made my decision WAY too hard. I absolutely agree with the OP.This is the most advanced MP3 player on the planet, and to ship it with 16GB Flash instead of an 80 or 160GB microdrive, like the classic has, was stupid IMHO.It would have also been considerably cheaper with a 160GB drive instead of 16GB of Flash.I have a 2nd Gen iPod and a 1st gen 4GB Nano, both still in perfect condition. The Touch was to be my next purchase, but now I'm just not so sure any more.To be totally honest, the 160GB iPod Classic is a FAR better buy. It's cheaper, has 10 times the storage, has the... » Read More I absolutely agree with the OP.This is the most advanced MP3 player on the planet, and to ship it with 16GB Flash instead of an 80 or 160GB microdrive, like the classic has, was stupid IMHO.It would have also been considerably cheaper with a 160GB drive instead of 16GB of Flash.I have a 2nd Gen iPod and a 1st gen 4GB Nano, both still in perfect condition. The Touch was to be my next purchase, but now I'm just not so sure any more.To be totally honest, the 160GB iPod Classic is a FAR better buy. It's cheaper, has 10 times the storage, has the same new interface and OS, and lasts 40 hours per charge.Apple has made my decision WAY too hard. « Show Less
583034
I would save the $100 and buy the 30GB model. Spend the saved $$ on some decent headphones! I have about 2300 songs on my 30GB and have only used about 10GB so far. I also have several hundred photos loaded on it. The camera connector is awesome for traveling.