I think it's more to the point that the Nano/Classic is one platform, and Touch/iPhone is another*. I suspect the codec uberchip in the former is capable of perhaps a bit more than in the latter.
*The Nano and Classic are essentially just flash and HD based versions of the same product now, with the same custom embedded OS, UI, etc, while the Touch and iPhone are OS X based. It's really two distinct product families at this point, being sold under one name. Well, three, with the Shuffle.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-09-11 07:17 pm (UTC)*The Nano and Classic are essentially just flash and HD based versions of the same product now, with the same custom embedded OS, UI, etc, while the Touch and iPhone are OS X based. It's really two distinct product families at this point, being sold under one name. Well, three, with the Shuffle.