iPod’s successor is the Apple Watch

“When Apple announced the tiny sixth-generation iPod nano in 2010, Steve Jobs joked that some people at Apple had suggested you could wear it as a watch — and some people tried,” Jason Snell writes for Macworld. “That particular iPod model is long gone, and now the iPod nano has been discontinued entirely.”

“But the spirit of the iPod nano lives on, and it turns out that that instinct from 2010 wasn’t that far off,” Snell writes. “Apple might not make a classic iPod anymore, but the product that most resembles it in Apple’s 2017 line-up is the Apple Watch.”

Play music without your iPhone.
Play music without your iPhone.
Snell writes, “I’m not saying that everyone who misses the iPod nano or iPod shuffle should run out and buy an Apple Watch — it’s much more expensive than those iPods! — but there’s no denying that the Apple Watch fills a lot of the same niches, but in a modern way.”

Much more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Yes, as we wrote last month:

We haven’t touched our iPod nano or iPod shuffle units since we strapped on our first Apple Watches over 2 years ago.

When working out: Apple Watch + AirPods. Done!

Requiem for Apple’s iPod shuffle – August 2, 2017
Apple discontinues iPod nano and iPod shuffle – July 27, 2017
How to listen to music on your Apple Watch without your iPhone and more – June 17, 2016


  1. Love my Apple Watch but it still doesn’t compare to the original iPods.

    I went to Costco last week to buy the blue version of the final Nano before they are gone forever.

    The iPod interfaces have always been very good for listening and finding music.

    I use the Watch for music sometimes when I am running without another device, but it requires more work, and the space management issue is still there though that will likely fall away as memory capacity increases in future models.

    It’s the end of an era that’s for sure.

    1. Great point, the Watch requires more work than an iPod (I used to use the Nano) or iPhone for many tasks. The convenience of having it on your wrist doesn’t always make up for the additional taps, force touches and scrolling you have to do, not to mention inability to use one hand like you can with the other devices. (I’d be glad with an even bigger screen than 42mm too)

      I listen to a lot of podcasts, but I keep them on my iPhone, I haven’t considered syncing them to my Watch. When I’m on the treadmill or running, I much prefer reaching into to pocket and manually clicking the volume buttons (works every time) to raising my watch, clicking the app selector, selecting the Now Playing app and scrolling the digital crown to adjust volume. Double tapping the AirPods both stops playback, which I don’t like, and is no better than 50% consistent (either Siri won’t activate or won’t hear my command correctly).

      This is part of the tradeoff of having purpose-built devices and all(or most)-in-ones. I hope they don’t shy away from sticking with and perhaps even adding physical buttons to their devices (at least allowing more hot-key-type functionality).

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.