Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

One of the photos literally shows an actual 1st-gen iPod on top of it.


Did you read my entire comment?


Yes.


Your comment (especially the colloquial use of the word "literally" as emphasis) implies that I didn't address the existence of that photo, but I did when I said "scroll down to see photos that actually demonstrate its size". Your comment and subsequent lack of clarification ("Yes.") is confusing and has the appearance of rudeness, but I can't guess why you would want to use that tone (if it's on purpose).


When something is shown literally as a picture of an object that is in contrast to a figurative drawing of a concept.


K.


Always try to either engage or not engage, rather than falling for the temptation of trolling.


K.


Ah yes. I'll just pull out my 1st gen iPod from my pocket for reference then!


You've seen enough pictures of people holding them to get a good reference for the size.


I've owned one. But that was a million years ago. It's somewhere between the size of a box of matches and my current phone, but that's a pretty big range.

Edit: OK so maybe the reference of a gen 1 ipod is actually quite useful to me. But it's a 20 year old reference to use. Surely there are plenty of things around that are more useful as a reference point if you need one (or just provide measurements).


I am not a rich american, so I have not.


Since when could only rich Americans use image searches? Or are you just being facetious?

Let me Google that for you: https://images.app.goo.gl/hW7G3NaixUd4sNUc7


The iPod was about the size of a deck of cards but 50% thicker.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: