Want a nano? Don't forget the protective case.
When Steve announced the iPod nano, almost immediately some began expressing concern that the thing is too small to be structurally sound. I must admit that when I held one in my hands, while I was amazed at its tiny size, I thought it might be somewhat susceptible to breakage.
Ars Technica stress-tested the iPod nano by sitting on it, by dropping it from various heights and speeds, and by running over it with a car. Twice.
The result? The nano proved to be remarkably resilient. However, although the music playing functions remained intact through all these trials, the screen died early on, after a 9-foot drop. (It took all this abuse, plus a 40-foot drop, to kill the nano entirely.)
Apparently, some users are experiencing problems with screens breaking. One user has set up a website to provide a forum for these afflicted nano users to express their thoughts on it. Reading through the comments there, there is a common thread that should serve as a warning to nano owners: They all carried it in their pockets without a rigid case.
I believe the core problem is bending. The nano appears to be more susceptible to bending for two reasons:
1. The case's form factor. For example, take a 2-foot long 6-sided cardboard box that is 1 inch thick and try to bend it. It bends fairly easily; it isn't much different than a single piece of cardboard. However, make the same box 6 inches thick, and it is much harder to bend. You might be able to dent it, but the greater structure afforded by the slightly wider sides prevent it from easily bending like a single piece of cardboard. In the same way, the thicker mini is much more rigid than a nano. (The rounded edges of the mini probably help a little too.)
2. Internal components. One of the primary differences between the nano and the mini is that the nano lacks a hard drive. A side effect of the drive may have been that it afforded the mini more structural integrity. The nano has no substantially rigid internal component.
I think that Apple should have shipped the nano with a rigid case (or made the nano itself more rigid), and should have avoided the theatrical revelation of the nano at its September 7 event in which Steve Jobs implied that the purpose of the little tiny pocket in your jeans was to carry the nano. The nano should not be carried in ANY pocket without protection, much less the one that happens to be at the crux of the strongest joint in my body. Any nano which is routinely carried the way Jobs did is sure to break. (In fact, I suspect that Jobs didn't insert the nano into that pocket until a few moments before he pulled it out. He had sat down before that point, and the pressures on the nano probably would have killed the screen.)
Having said that however, I ultimately blame user carelessness for this issue. The nano is obviously a delicate piece of electronics, and it is obvious just from looking at it that bending it will destroy it.
So now what? Apple should fix the problem before it gets out of hand. "But FreeiPodGuy," I hear you say, "you just said it wasn't Apple's fault." Fault is not the issue. Bad publicity is the issue. Apple needs good PR right now. The iPod nano is their bread and butter not only this Christmas season, but through at least part of 2006. Sale of Macintosh computers is down a bit right now because some users are waiting for the next generation of Intel-based Macs which will not ship until some time next year. Until then Apple needs nano revenues. Whether this is Apple's fault or not, they should make an investment in their future and provide replacements to affected users, along with some preventative action, such as a discount on a case from the Apple Store.
---------------------
UPDATE, 7:00 pm:
After Matt's responses to e-mailers on the flawedmusicplayer.com site linked above, I have decided that I'm going to take a slightly harder position against Apple on this. Although I do still think that iPod nano users should use common sense in handling such a delicate device, Apple clearly says on their website that this device is appropriate to be transported in a pocket. (Here's a Google link to Apple.com pages containing the terms "nano" and "pocket". Curiously, Apple's main iPod nano page is not one of them.) As I say above, in my opinion, this device is clearly unsuitable to be in a pocket, especially pants. But because Apple has advertised that activity as OK, Apple is morally--and probably legally--obligated to warranty the nano against any resulting damages.
Ars Technica stress-tested the iPod nano by sitting on it, by dropping it from various heights and speeds, and by running over it with a car. Twice.
The result? The nano proved to be remarkably resilient. However, although the music playing functions remained intact through all these trials, the screen died early on, after a 9-foot drop. (It took all this abuse, plus a 40-foot drop, to kill the nano entirely.)
Apparently, some users are experiencing problems with screens breaking. One user has set up a website to provide a forum for these afflicted nano users to express their thoughts on it. Reading through the comments there, there is a common thread that should serve as a warning to nano owners: They all carried it in their pockets without a rigid case.
I believe the core problem is bending. The nano appears to be more susceptible to bending for two reasons:
1. The case's form factor. For example, take a 2-foot long 6-sided cardboard box that is 1 inch thick and try to bend it. It bends fairly easily; it isn't much different than a single piece of cardboard. However, make the same box 6 inches thick, and it is much harder to bend. You might be able to dent it, but the greater structure afforded by the slightly wider sides prevent it from easily bending like a single piece of cardboard. In the same way, the thicker mini is much more rigid than a nano. (The rounded edges of the mini probably help a little too.)
2. Internal components. One of the primary differences between the nano and the mini is that the nano lacks a hard drive. A side effect of the drive may have been that it afforded the mini more structural integrity. The nano has no substantially rigid internal component.
I think that Apple should have shipped the nano with a rigid case (or made the nano itself more rigid), and should have avoided the theatrical revelation of the nano at its September 7 event in which Steve Jobs implied that the purpose of the little tiny pocket in your jeans was to carry the nano. The nano should not be carried in ANY pocket without protection, much less the one that happens to be at the crux of the strongest joint in my body. Any nano which is routinely carried the way Jobs did is sure to break. (In fact, I suspect that Jobs didn't insert the nano into that pocket until a few moments before he pulled it out. He had sat down before that point, and the pressures on the nano probably would have killed the screen.)
Having said that however, I ultimately blame user carelessness for this issue. The nano is obviously a delicate piece of electronics, and it is obvious just from looking at it that bending it will destroy it.
So now what? Apple should fix the problem before it gets out of hand. "But FreeiPodGuy," I hear you say, "you just said it wasn't Apple's fault." Fault is not the issue. Bad publicity is the issue. Apple needs good PR right now. The iPod nano is their bread and butter not only this Christmas season, but through at least part of 2006. Sale of Macintosh computers is down a bit right now because some users are waiting for the next generation of Intel-based Macs which will not ship until some time next year. Until then Apple needs nano revenues. Whether this is Apple's fault or not, they should make an investment in their future and provide replacements to affected users, along with some preventative action, such as a discount on a case from the Apple Store.
---------------------
UPDATE, 7:00 pm:
After Matt's responses to e-mailers on the flawedmusicplayer.com site linked above, I have decided that I'm going to take a slightly harder position against Apple on this. Although I do still think that iPod nano users should use common sense in handling such a delicate device, Apple clearly says on their website that this device is appropriate to be transported in a pocket. (Here's a Google link to Apple.com pages containing the terms "nano" and "pocket". Curiously, Apple's main iPod nano page is not one of them.) As I say above, in my opinion, this device is clearly unsuitable to be in a pocket, especially pants. But because Apple has advertised that activity as OK, Apple is morally--and probably legally--obligated to warranty the nano against any resulting damages.
You may remember meeting FreeiPodCat a few weeks ago. I was watching