iPod nano

[gekko]

I really like the price point of the iPod Shuffle, but why the heck does it not come with even a simplistic LCD screen?  512MB of music is great, but how is one supposed to be able to browse the tracks?  Not that this has anything whatsoever to do with the iPod Nano.

If I was in the market for an MP3 player right now, I'd really lean towards an RCA Lyra or anything else that has an expansion slot for additional SD memory.  It strikes me as just being more convenient to have the ability to save songs to several SD cards and just plug them in.
[right][snapback]88655[/snapback][/right]

I own an iPod, and I also have a 128 mb mp3 player similar to the shuffle - built in rechargable battery, no display, very simple controls. I received the small player free as a prize at work, and have used it far more than I originally expected to. I particularly enjoy it at the gym, or anytime I want to carry some music with me but don't feel like carrying a $380 (CAN) mp3 player. At the gym, I simply don't care what song is playing. By removing the LCD screen, apple cuts down the size, weight and power consumption of the player considerably.

Keep in mind that even with their "bare-bones" lineup, apple sets its aim primarily on the higher end of the market. The new iPod nano is a perfect example - the 2 gb version is priced at the same point as most companys' 5 gb players, many of which include an FM tuner, voice recorder and other such extras. The iPod shuffles were cheap for the ammount of memory when they were released, but this is no longer the case. Off the top of my head, I can think of 4 or 5 players with 512 mb of memory priced at or below the price of the small iPod shuffle. All but one of those players has a screen, and most offer something else the shuffle does not - expandable memory, fm tuner, voice recorder. If you want those features, you have to jump up to the mini and now to the nano.

gekko