digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

iPod Nano Spy Shots Confirmed as Real by Apple Legal

gizmodo.com — Apple Legal has asked Giz to take down the iPhone nano spy shots from earlier today, and out of respect for The Steve, we've complied

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • DavidRoss, on 10/10/2007, -12/+153It just means they look so bad, apple does not want anyone to think its real
    • NgrHader, on 10/10/2007, -28/+6Does it look Superbad? sorry I had to joke
    • Hickeroar, on 10/10/2007, -3/+28Seriously... This is major step backwards for the design dept at apple...
      • abhiroop, on 10/10/2007, -16/+1Design dept?? don't u mean Steve
        • fanclerks, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Actually, I thought they were designed by Jonathan Ives?
          • abhiroop, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2What I implied was that by saying: "it sucks, do it again" the iPod is sleek and easy to use. A lot of people don't realise how hard it is to say it sucks, years of failures (Lisa, Newton, Cube) have taught Jobbs that his designers aren't always right.
    • flashboy131, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4"You can never be too ... chubby"
      come on it writes itself.
    • streak, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Anything non-Apple with a click-wheel violates Apple's intellectual property, or so one would expect Apple to claim. Beyond a clickwheel, just because Apple complains, that doesn't mean the pics look much like the new nano.
    • Elranzer, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2I can't be the only one who thinks the so-called "Spy Shot" is a really crappy Bevel-n-Embross job in Photoshop. The shadows definitely don't look right.
    • theprez, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Would Apple really use the same old flower arrangement to sell new iPods?: http://images.apple.com/pr/photos/iMac/imac_flowershot.jpg

      Besides, it looks like crap, no way would Apple release something like that considering the expectations after the iPhone.
      • m1tch37, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Spy Photo =/= Advertising Campaign
      • diggimator, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Huh? http://www.apple.com/ilife/ --- flower arrangement, just this month
        I always read weird arguments when it comes to debating whether or not pics of alleged new mac products are real. When the G4 cube pics were leaked, so many people argued that it was fake because the picture was photoshopped. Well, it was photoshopped, but the product was real!
      • EmileVictor, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Anyway, that's a cameraphone shot of what would probably be a pre-production (i.e. before photoshop) shot of the ipods. Don't expect anything special.

        By the way, a photographer probably just lost his golden client.
    • jawbreaker4fs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That's not necessarily true... Gizmodo has done an assessment posted somewhere on their site that the Apple legal team ALWAYS asks them to take down images that are real, and NEVER asks them to take down images that are fake.

      Ever hear of Mill's methods of inference?
    • Niz1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1if your right its pretty ignorant of gizmodo to presume that its the real deal.
    • MauiMac, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2It doesn't look to bad... After a while you'll get use to the way it looks...
    • moiremusic, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0WTF... is this story about an iPhone Nano, or a redesigned iPod Nano? Even the description of this story contradicts itself.
    • sirmasterboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Wait, if it really wasnt Apple's real product, then how would they have the power to demand the pic to be taken down. You can't just take down pics of something that isnt even your product or made by you.

      To take it down they would have to have the rights to it and why would they have the rights to a media player they dont make?

      Face it, has to be theirs...
  • Ogre73, on 10/10/2007, -2/+26The thing that has me most suspicious is that there is no pink nano pictured in those 'spy shots', which is probably the #2 seller after black (since doing away with white).
  • manduvi, on 10/10/2007, -6/+48I think Steve does this things to test the market opinion on some designs...
    • sakuraz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I thought this was to catch the leakers.
    • mrfreeziexp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I hope you're right manduvi. Steve,if you are reading this, please don't release those nanos! They're terrible! Ugly ugly ugly.
  • Dihuko, on 10/10/2007, -13/+107At first, I started to believe that these were real, especially after Apple requested the photos be taken down. However, I began to think. Remeber the iPhone press conference? Steve Jobs said that Apple themselves created mock-ups and fakes to be released into the wild to mis-direct people. What if (hopefully) they are doing the same thing with this new iPod except taking it a step further making people think it is actually real and then BAM! New iPod that is 1000x better than this.
    • chaloobe360, on 10/10/2007, -0/+18Dihuko, I can only wish your prediction will come true. Getting Apple Legal involved is very suspicious, but those "nano's" look ugly!
    • PhoenixAvatar2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+21Especially after Giz posted the article about how they can guess on any spy mock-up based on Apple Legal, I would think that Apple's trying some reverse psychology.
    • o0adam0o, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Agreed.
    • sbgskl, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2Sounds plausible except for the part about Jobs saying Apple created fake mock-ups, which you made up.
    • Shiftyeyedgoat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Maybe they released "test-prototypes" from behind the screen to gauge public reaction to these "spy-shots". If they get an "ohhhh aaah" response, maybe that's the prototype they'll choose for mass production.
    • Ireland, on 10/10/2007, -12/+3iPod nano 3G: http://www.flickr.com/photos/83512992@N00/1020148556/
    • mossblaser, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Dugg for use of "BAM!"
    • WorldLeader, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1This is how Apple drives down share prices so people "in the know" can purchase stocks while the price has a momentary dip. They just keep milking these ugly fake nanos up until they release the new ultra-sexy touchscreen nanos and shares skyrocket.

      It isn't that hard to imagine.
  • Dagreenman, on 10/10/2007, -2/+20It's not terrible, just weird. It will depend on the actual size and weight of the unit, not to mention weither or not it will implement Coverflow and wireless.
    • Niz1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1agreed the gizmodo shop version looks quite good, if its a small unit it would actually be ok, as it f the screen is the same size as the current video then that would suck, if its a smaller screen and on the whole smaller then it would be ok. Although id prefer it if it was the current nano squashed rather than the current video squashed and called the nano.
  • bxbomber, on 10/10/2007, -2/+32Any links to the pics I didn't see them.
  • 80hd, on 10/10/2007, -3/+16tfsu?
  • adml_shake, on 10/10/2007, -4/+13That in no way means that the pic is real. Apple has a history of going after people posting stuff like this, best way to throw people off the real track would be to send a C&D order to they guys hosting the fake pics...
    • normalkid, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7afaik, apple's never sent a C&D to a fake image. give an example if you can.
      • foxymcfox, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Not an image...but what about Asteroid? They went after blogs to reveal their sources for a FAKE product.
      • streak, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1It looks like a real click-wheel to me. Apple certainly has design patents on the click-wheel. Apple would have cause to complain just for that.
        • streak, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The Zune clickwheel doesn't look much like Apple's and certainly doesn't work like it. Apple doesn't have to complain about every use of its imagery either, but if an image devalues Apple IP or its ability to market, then Apple should complain.
  • Spamcan, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2I keep my iPod Nano in my wallet so I wouldn't buy a wide one as a replacement.
    • andrew.bell, on 10/10/2007, -0/+19Costanza
    • sam10685, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I doubt this is real anyway. Apple has been using lots of glass in their products and I think multi touch is their thing now also.
  • guyinjapan, on 10/10/2007, -10/+3And thus Apple's time has come and gone.

    (I'm not being serious, but I still can't help but feel like this is a step backwards from the Nano we have now...)
  • digitallysick, on 10/10/2007, -5/+9the nano would lose its small form factor with those images, i believe them to be made by apple, or someone, they are fake. Next ipod will have a touch screen like the iphone for sure. How do i know? when people speak steve listens, digg me down if you like, but everything we bitch about comes to pass, after all his job is easy, give the people what they want. We wanted an iphone, we got one, we wanted new imacs, we got those to
    • Mac101, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0Preach brother! You sound like a true preacher for the Cult of Mac, bringing the words from El Jobso to all the Apple faithful. Keep it up.
    • SouthsideIrish, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I don't believe it will be touch screen for a minute. I don't think Apple wants to take sales from the iPhone this early, and I am beginning to wonder if Apple will ever come out with a hard drive based player again. So, I expect to see a 16gb Nano this year, and sometime next year, a 32gb flash iPod Video.
  • Retnuh730, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3I predict that it'll keep the nano's thickness, if not slimmer. This might be like the nano Video line, not just a nano replacement.
  • Frosty122, on 10/10/2007, -9/+4i do like the larger screen, however i'll stick with my sansa.....
    • edwartica, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Oops, double post. Sorry.
    • edwartica, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Coulkdn't agree with you more! I love my sansa.
  • Me1000, on 10/10/2007, -11/+8Gizmodo spam!

    They just made it up to get more publicity!
  • KriLL3.2™, on 10/10/2007, -3/+28I really don't understand this move, if you want a small mp3 player you can strap to your forearm or put in a pocket without it being noticable you got a nano.
    If you wanted a big clunker to play video on and have most of your music collection on you got an iPod.
    And if you wanted something really cheap you got the shuffle.

    Seems the old space the nano vacated will be empty now, this isn't a new nano, it's a mini iPod. Making it a lot wider and giving it a larger screen might have been nice if you actually wanted it to play video, but why stop at a nano if you want a full featured video player? Get the iPod.

    The screen isn't large enough to be good with video, and the device itself has poor dimensions (almost square), it feels like a compromise between the nano and the full iPod, thus removing all that was good in both formats: the big screen and big storage of the iPod, and the small footprint of the nano.

    Did I mention it's f.ugly?
    • ainGide, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1There's definitely space for a product like this. The primary use of my MP3 player is running/working out, so the solid-state Nano (even this slightly larger one) is perfect. Sometimes, though, I'd like to watch some TV, video podcasts, etc. on flights, waiting at the doctor, or whatever. This would fulfill both of those needs without having to buy two devices.

      As long as it's got 16+ gigs of memory I'm in. The aesthetic is jarring at first, but I don't have much concern as to the usability.
    • sharpie05, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"...seems the old space the nano vacated will be empty now... "

      welll... yeah. it was vacated wasnt it?
    • zeejay, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You say this authoritatively, but nobody seems to know the actual physical size of the thing. The jury's out until we know how big or small it is, imo...
    • gfnw, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Which is also why I hope the don't go the multitouch route with the nano. It makes it hard to control from a pocket or without looking.
  • st3vo, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2Price?
  • NiGHTSChao, on 10/10/2007, -16/+3Zune ftw
    • Mac101, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7Zune is trash. iPod FTW!
      • gfnw, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Zune is good! iPod is good! Choice FTW! Fanboys FTL.
  • TheWeez, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7Apple issues cease and desist orders all the time for these fake mochups.
  • Barbarino, on 10/10/2007, -16/+2But will it blend?
    • aDJsavedmylife, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2In sovet russia...
      I for one welcome our new..overlords

      1.
      2.???
      3. profit

      Does it run Linux..

      Any more you'd like to get out of your system?
      • jkoke, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Imagine a beowulf cluster of those...
      • DaffyDuck, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2digg should automatically add this post as the first comment of every thread.
  • Shiftyeyedgoat, on 10/10/2007, -5/+67link to actual spyshot photos: http://boardsus.playstation.com/playstation/board/message?board.id=offtopic&thread.id=1985196
    • WiLLGT09, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4ah, ya beat me to it. i was just about to post that link...tv distracted me.
    • eyefork, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Thanks...I step away from Digg for one second and the photos come and go
  • AlexRichfield, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1No confirmation here--Apple doesn't want people to wait to buy a product due to their "knowledge" that there is a new version in the near future--especially if it's fake.
    • vandy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The current iPods are sold out in most retail outlets right now, though. Selection is becoming limited and stores are confirming that they don't have any new shipments coming.
  • ACrazyGerman, on 10/10/2007, -7/+18***** ugly *****
  • fukstevejobs, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1good, but its predecessor was better
  • kriminalintent, on 10/10/2007, -4/+15Looks fat. Anyone thinking it needs an eating disorder.
  • toetagger, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8If you take actual images of iPods, photoshop them to make the stubby, etc...
    It is still an intellectual property issue... does not make them real. Besides, the colors are ugly.
  • iCallShotgun, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Awe come on Apple, are you serious?
  • poponegra, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2007/08/nano_spy.jpg
    nano-flower.psd at the top
    • meatmcguffin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yup, because photoshop can't tidy or resize an image
  • SBeckstrand, on 10/10/2007, -2/+22apple have never 'confirmed' a product before launch in their existence. burried as inaccurate
  • Takuro, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Looks like a 5th gen video iPod and a Nano had an ugly child. :/
    • eyefork, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3I dont think they had it, it looks more like an aborted fetus. With leprosy
      • Vikkiey, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0And above all, its probably the ugliest piece of technology I've ever seen.
        Makes me throw up in my mouth a little... *gag*
  • poponegra, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2007/08/nano_spy.jpg
    nano-flower.psd at the top :P
    • theprez, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3We heard you the first time *****.... (that's his username spanish-to-english)
    • davidpower, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0ola senoir
  • akhomerun, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Inaccurate title alert!! This may be true, but the only thing Apple Legal asked them to do was to take the images down, they did not say anything to confirm it for real.
    • mabhatter, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2But a C&D implies that the information is illegally obtained from Apple sources. If it's just a mockup from a fanboy, like the fake iMac pics last months then they would be violation of the law by swearing that the material posted was breeching their trade secrets.
    • FreeiPodGuy.com, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What's the difference?
  • weedmonk, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Lol...Go read the fanboi's comments on Engadget. The iTards are gonna have to STFU now.
  • waterdrop, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2What makes everyone think it's a Nano? Maybe it's an updated hard drive based iPod.
    • mabhatter, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2one person at Mac Rumors compared it to a nano by using the click wheel as reference. It looks like a nano-thickness device with a regular ipod size screen and probably flash as storage. The surface area is still about the same as a nano, it would work well on a lasso or belt like current nanos are used and probably play video but with a restricted storage space.
  • kahrytan, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2It doesn't confirm ANYTHING. It just means their legal department doesn't want that picture ruining the market for the real Iphone nano. Someone people are idiots
    • eyefork, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2"Iphone nano" Some people are idiots
  • schavira, on 10/10/2007, -7/+4Almost as ugly as the new iMacs OH SHI
  • manti5, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4The 1G Nanos looked the best anyways, I didn't like the look of the "mini 2" 2Gs.
  • Crowlos, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1My goodness Apple, just release the new ipods already.......
  • BWhaler, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3But the nano is the "workout iPod" for your arm, etc. Why would Apple do this?
  • bnsqueak, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Also, the thing that has made apple products so popular, design wise, is their skinny, streamlined designs. This iPod is just...fat. and thus not apple-y. Please don't give us fatties, Apple. America has enough as it is.
  • pak314, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I hope that is not the real thing because it looks way out of proportion. I broke my nano a few months back and was holding off for the new generation. If this is verified, i'm going to rush and buy the old one before it becomes obsolete.
  • eyefork, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3Sickeningly ugly
  • abhiroop, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I'm personally hoping for the 32GB flash drives (that are being released on the new lightweight laptops). This would be ideal for the iPod. better battery, better playback, lighter, doesn't get as hot, more storage (than nano...)
    • Iam9376, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0considering the 32GB SSD drives cost around $400 just for the drive, I doubt they'll be put into the iPod/iPhone lines any time soon
  • railsroad, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5My 4g Iphone isn't charging as of this morning.

    All I want is an iPhone sans phone.
    WiFi
    Widescreen
    Touchscreen

    Pretty Please ^_^
    • killercow, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1that would be a nokia n800
      plusses because its linux based. :) (the design is pretty much nokia all the way though)
    • edwartica, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I can't stand touchscreens. They get dirty too easily.
  • Skor459, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0That looks like a very cheap redesign. I was at least expecting a very high screen to plastic ratio, but this looks to be just covered, framed, and generally wrapped-up in plastic.
  • jhuebel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7First, Apple Legal didn't confirm anything. So this story is buried as inaccurate. Second, they show a Beatles album as the cover art on the iPod (in the rendering at least). That's about as real as the Yellow Submarine iPod Video that Merlyn Mann has been talking about for months. The guys at gizmodo are idiots. Why do people continue to fall for their nonsense?
    • Elliuotatar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Of course they confirmed something. It would be quite illegal for them to send a takedown notice for a photoshop job they didn't own. And all they would need to do is say it's not the new ipod to get it to go away if it really wasn't.
      • MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2It confirms nothing. Guess how much it costs Apple to send a C & D order? Go on guess! OK, I'll tell you...NOTHING! They got gaggles of lawyers on retainer just waiting for some bit of html flotsam to send writs and C & Ds, and other lawyerly stuff who's names I don't know because those guys don't seem quite human!
    • Quickdood, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Jhuebel I am guessing you didn't see the actual picture. The picture you are talking about with the beatles album on it is one gizmodo put together, the real picture had nothing on the screen, it showed the ipods as off.
    • vandy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I have the Beatles on my iPod, what's to stop them from using the album cover for their mockup?
  • zdiggler, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2look like an iPod. :(
  • unfinite, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8better mock up: http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s6/unfinite/ipodnanomockup.png
  • totetite, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0I don't know what this is. Rumor is always rumor. Could be a sick joke.
    http://www.qualibuy.com/mysterypix.png
  • xMikey, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Fake. At the top it says 'nano-flower.psd'. Someone was having fun with Photoshop!
  • paulgibson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I like it. Its not too bad. I don't mind the departure in design but I must admit it will take some getting used to. I hope they have revised the interface too.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 88 of 88 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.