[angusmatheson]

I have a terrible admission. I wore an iPod nano for a watch for years. Compared to by Apple Watch series 2 - it looks so much better. The Series is so pudgy, so rounded. The iPod nano is angular and big in a way that makes it look impressive. And the crown makes the series 2 look like a watch, while the iPod nano looked very clearly like something from the future. Given the watch is as much about decoration as function, I hope the Apple Watch of the future looks better. (I can't believe they make the series 2 thicker, when has Apple ever done that!)

[Closingracer]

Than return it and move on? I love my series 2 SS watch and want it to look like a watch because it is one

[scruffypig]

I also have the Nano 6G. It works great as a watch and I love the watch faces way more than my Watch Series 2. I think Apple put more careful thought into the UI design and function into the Nano 6G. It is intuitive, simple and just works. I love that the Nano 6G Nike function speaks to me and gives helpful info. I sometimes wish I could put the Nano 6G and it's interface on my Apple Watch Series 2.

[Mac Guy]

I have a 6G nano and like it a lot. The UI is very intuitive, but let's face it— it can be because the think doesn't do a lot, so it doesn't need a lot of UI.

I wanted to make a watch out of it, but felt the available bands just didn't look that good and were too pricey. By the time I figure 'why not', the few bands available were waaaaay pricey, so it never became a watch.

[scruffypig]

I have a 6G nano and like it a lot. The UI is very intuitive, but let's face it— it can be because the think doesn't do a lot, so it doesn't need a lot of UI.

I wanted to make a watch out of it, but felt the available bands just didn't look that good and were too pricey. By the time I figure 'why not', the few bands available were waaaaay pricey, so it never became a watch.

Maybe I was just lucky, but I have a whole drawer full of Nano 6G watch bands, and they were all very inexpensive, leather, etc. I found them on their manufacturer's website on sale at deep discounted prices. I wouldn't have them otherwise and I understand what you are saying.

[angusmatheson]

I think I am missing simplicity. I really like my series 2 too, but here is a lot going on there. The new Apple TV has the same problem. The iPod nano Watch was so simple. But using it made sense. The Apple Watch does so much more, but at the price of almost exponential increase in complexity to the user. I wish Apple Watch, Apple TV, even iOS, I would give up features for the features that are there to work well and their use to be clearer.

[Mac Guy]

The iPod nano Watch was so simple... The Apple Watch does so much more,

And there you have it. First, that iPod nano wasn't a watch. It was an MP3 player (iPod) that had as an added feature, a time-telling function. Wasn't a lot going on, so the UI was very light and simple.

Second, Apple isn't going to make a Pebble. And most people do expect a lot out of a smartwatch, and especially a Watch. Given the competition and price point, it doesn't make sense for Apple to make a Watch bereft of features. Apple doesn't want to play in the low end of the pool.

[StraightlineBoy]

I remember thinking at the time that all it lacked was Bluetooth and then in the next generation they completely changed the shape and what seemed obvious was no more.
I suppose with hindsight I can see that it was probably too early for Bluetooth as it's still a flaky technology so perhaps it's why it never evolved down that route.

[Mac Guy]

Both battery tech and BT being what it was at that time, I'm sure Apple thought about it, and thought better of it. I wasn't interested in the next one—Gen 7—but it's larger size probably made room for more battery, needed for both BT and video on a bigger screen.