
Apple Apparently Discontinues iPod Nano and iPod Shuffle - janober
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/07/27/apple-removes-ipod-nano-ipod-shuffle/
======
jandrese
Not updated since 2010 or 2012, and declining sales? I wonder if there is any
possibility that these two facts were related?

The shuffle in particular seems to still have a place as a super portable
player you use while jogging or biking or whatever, but was hampered in recent
years by lack of support for Airpods. I get that the usage model is "just use
your phone", but phones are not always a great size for this.

~~~
keltex
My wife loves them for running. She told me to order 2 immediately before they
run out of stock.

~~~
maxxxxx
Same here. I have a very old Nano for hiking and running. Using a phone is not
a replacement for this. Can the Apple Watch be used as player?

~~~
gtufano
Yes, only with bluetooth earphones, 64K stereo only, just a single playlist
that's synced with Music on the phone (last time I tried, at least).

~~~
maxxxxx
Single playlist is not good. Time to buy another Nano 4th gen just in case....

~~~
runwerks
watchOS 4 adds more playlists.

------
yourapostasy
The iPod Shuffle is the perfect form factor for my specific use case: I plug a
second generation model into the gym's sound system (I work out at 3 am, I'm
the only one there at the time), leaving my phone to run the fitness app and
heart rate monitor. It recharges as fast as my bike blinkies when I get back,
and because I listen to the exact same workout playlist every time, I don't
have to fidget with the tracks on it.

There are still scads of these units on eBay after a quick check, so I'll
probably scoop up a couple, because the Apple UI to load the simple playlist
is what I use for all my other music devices, so switching to a different UI
would just be more overhead for me at this point.

With some re-branding, these could be re-positioned as children's first music
devices. They can be priced cheap enough to give to really young children
without stressing over losing them, say $30 USD. It would still suck, but not
in the same way as if a child lost an iPhone 7. And it gets children into
Apple's ecosystem early, and the children can even use the UI themselves
because the constrained environment makes drastically simplifying the UI
possible. I think Apple is giving up an opportunity here to create an
advertising platform for their ecosystem that is paid by their own customers.

~~~
dmix
If you're not carrying it while you run how is the tiny iPod Shuffle perfect
form factor? You're just "plugging it into the sound system"?

I personally leave my big Nexus 6P on the ground on top of my towel next to
machines while I work out, connecting to headphones via bluetooth with a $40
headphone amp that clips onto to my shirt or shorts:

[https://www.amazon.com/Creative-Headphone-Amplifier-
Integrat...](https://www.amazon.com/Creative-Headphone-Amplifier-Integrated-
Smartphones/dp/B00J2JATL0)

Works well for me and the sound is great (despite the fact it's made by
Creative and not overpriced autophile-ware).

Now that Bluetooth headphones are a thing I don't see the utility in the
shuffle anymore.

I bet Apple views bluetooth headphones as the portable iPod killer more than
anything...

~~~
yourapostasy
When I go early enough, there is no one there. They let me plug my iPod
Shuffle into the sound system via the headphone jack, and enjoy the experience
of working out with my playlist going out over the speakers. It's not the same
as when I have headphones on; not better, just different, and I like the
change.

When I work out with other gym customers present, I use my headphones.

I agree that with Bluetooth headphones going in the $20-30 range, the use of
headphone jack-based devices will go down over time. But there are _a lot_ of
those jacks out there in the world, so it will take a long time.

------
Brendinooo
I wonder when enough of the relevant patents for the iPod Classics expire that
someone can use the tech to create their own take on it? I have to think there
are profits available for someone who takes the old chassis and builds on the
form factor.

EDIT: Just looked over the Fiio line. Are they using the same tech as Apple?
Does the scroll wheel feel pretty similar?

------
oneeyedpigeon
Who's making good portable digital music players nowadays? In particular,
looking for a replacement for the iPod classic.

~~~
rlonstein
> Who's making good portable digital music players nowadays?

Flash-based? Sandisk's Sansa (Fuze, E and C-series, Clip, Clip sport, et.al.)
line has been around for a while and is good. I have a Fuze that is
approaching eight years old and has been battered until the paint flaked off
but it still works. They are supported by the Rockbox
([https://www.rockbox.org/](https://www.rockbox.org/)) firmware.

That said, I don't use it much any more as I usually have my phone with me.

~~~
fenwick67
I can also vouch for the sandisk clip line, they are simple and work
perfectly, and support lossless formats out of the box.

------
dkonofalski
I have some very fond memories of my iPods Nano (is that really how we have to
say it?). Farewell, old friend.

~~~
freehunter
>(is that really how we have to say it?)

I can't imagine why. Most formally it would be "iPod Nano devices", but most
people would say "iPod Nanos".

You only pluralize the words that there are actually multiple of. You may talk
about a Member of Parliament, but you wouldn't have Member of Parliaments
because you're not talking about multiple Parliaments. You're talking about
multiple members and a singular Parliament, so it's Members of Parliament.
Your city has a Chamber of Commerce, but your state has many Chambers of
Commerce.

But with the iPod Nano, it's not multiple iPods and a singular Nano. It's
multiple "iPod Nano" devices. So you'd just say "iPod Nanos".

~~~
dkonofalski
The Whopper Jr. would like to have a word with you. I did have multiple iPods
because the iPod is the name of the device and the "Nano" piece is a
descriptive adjective of which iPod it is.

~~~
freehunter
If you had multiple iPods including the Nano, you would say "multiple iPods
including the Nano". iPod is the brand name, Nano is the model. You can have
multiple iPods and multiple iPod Nanos but multiple iPods Nano is, at best,
heavily archaic use of the language.

I've owned two Corolla cars in my life. It doesn't make sense for me to say
"I've owned two Toyotas Corolla", does it? If I cloned this site, would I say
"there are two Hackers News"?

~~~
dkonofalski
No... Apple is the brand name, iPod is the product, and Nano is the descriptor
for which model of iPod. As mentioned in my last reply, it's not 2 Whopper
Jr.'s, it's 2 Whoppers Jr. Since Nano is an adjective, you pluralize the noun
which, in this case, is iPod.

~~~
freehunter
So I should be saying "Macbooks Pro", "Surfaces RT", or "iPads Pro". If I have
a Toyota Corolla S and then bought another, it should be "I have two Toyota
Corollas S". Would I also have multiple "Telsa Models S"?

Or you can end the ridiculous destruction of the English language and realize
that "Nano" isn't really an adjective in this case, but rather "iPod Nano" is
the entire noun and is pluralized as such. "Red iPods" has a noun and an
adjective and the noun is pluralized. If you dropped the word "iPod" from the
statement you'd still have a valid sentence "I have two Nano..." what? "Two
Nanos", or "Two Nano", since Nano is an adjective and can't be pluralized?

You asked "is that really how we have to say it?" and the answer is no. That
is decidedly not how you _have_ to say it. It may be how you _choose_ to say
it, but you don't have to, and most people would find it very odd phrasing
indeed. If you ask Apple, brand names cannot be pluralized, so their
recommendation is "iPod Nano mobile digital devices":
[https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-
property/trademark/...](https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-
property/trademark/appletmlist.html)

I do want to point out that no matter what Burger King says, The Onion has an
article specifically mocking that line of thinking:
[http://www.theonion.com/article/william-safire-orders-two-
wh...](http://www.theonion.com/article/william-safire-orders-two-whoppers-
junior-3351)

~~~
dkonofalski
Every single one of your examples in the first statement is grammatically
correct. You can call it ridiculous, if you want, but it doesn't change the
fact that it's grammatically correct to phrase it with the noun being
pluralized. In your other example, it doesn't apply because "Red" comes before
the noun and a "Nano" isn't a thing so it's not a noun either. If you want to
say "I have two Nanos", then you're using a colloquial description that turns
"Nano" into a noun.

Mocking rules of grammar doesn't make them incorrect. It is a weird rule, but
it is the proper way to write and speak the language.

------
wodenokoto
What is a good shuffle alternative?

------
Tiktaalik
Disappointing but expected as these devices haven't been updated in forever.

It's clear that Apple wants the Watch to be the new small scale iPod for
fitness use, but I really don't need all that fancy tech and the corresponding
high price of the Watch.

------
rjsw
I have a 6G Nano. It has a great UI but the physical buttons are really
fragile. It cost me less to get a new dumb phone plus a SD card than is would
have done to get the Nano repaired.

------
VeejayRampay
iPod Shuffle is the best there is for running, buuuut I suppose it endangers
Apple's business model and profitability so it needs to be sent to a farm
upstate.

~~~
gumby
I think the part of the model it endangers is selling sufficient volume of
product to make money. I have been surprised to see it still on the shelf in
recent years.

------
twoodfin
One step closer to ditching the iTunes app on the Mac?

