macnn/electronista
08/22/2007, 10:05am, EDT
Wednesday, August 22ndPurported photo of 3G iPod nano surfaces
A single photo today surfaced of what is rumored to be the third-generation iPod nano. The allgeded image appears to show a major revision of the flash-based player that widens but also shortens the device, allowing for a larger screen better suited to movies without boosting the overall size. The rumored unit would share the same miniature click wheel as the current iPod nano but would have tapered sides similar to the fifth-generation iPod. Aluminum would likely make up at least the front face of each device, with Apple switching to more muted colors such as pale green and wine red.
Features of the new players have not been described other than the addition of video playback. A release date for the devices is also unknown but would most likely be targeted for the Apple Expo Paris debut on September 25th.
While the source photo appears to have been opened in Photoshop and should be considered a potential fake by readers, separate Taiwanese reports have claimed that Apple is already in the midst of producing 16GB flash iPods for a late September release with similar claims of video playback, coinciding with Apple Expo and other unconfirmed reports. [via 9to5Mac]
, 
, 23
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
Top
subscribe to comments
for this article
http://www.greatfine.com/110.asp?id=179
Nice try from the original source.
I don't buy it.
I have seen two sets of rumors about this new iPod nano, though. I think it will turn out to be smaller than we think, and look slicker, but I do think it's real.
Using a little common sense can really work itself out pretty well.
And exactly why do we need wider iPod nanos? Or is it Apple's goal to basically force video onto its users?
And can someone explain how these much wider then current ipods somehow are bigger "without boosting the overall size?" Because they look way bigger then my nano.
Here's one vote for Photoshop.
Not only wouldn't a professional artist have the spacing uniform, but Steve would be having an OCD tizzy all over the place :)
Should have said "Not only would a professional artist..."
Blah