160GB classic vs. 2G Nano (Nano FTW!)

Question

Cross posted from another forum...
My bi-monthly housecleaner brought in a new girl to help out last week. The new girl helped alright. She helped herself to my black 8GB Nano and an (inexpensive) wristwatch, and has stopped answering her phone. Gotta love people.
Well I didn't use the Nano a ton, but I liked having it around. (I've been mostly using my iPhone, and the 160GB Classic I got with my iPhone refund money.) I also consider the 2G Nano to be Apple's finest touchwheel iPod from an industrial design standpoint. The new Nanos look and feel totally awkward to me. The 2G Nano is the last word in flash based mp3 players to date IMO, in terms of size, ease of use, battery life, and form factor.
So today I decided I missed my Nano and it was time to find another. No small feat it turns out. Ebay is a mix of used, fakes, and overpriced refurbs. Seems like a week ago they were everywhere here in NYC, but today they were nowhere to be found.
When I eventually found one, brand new for $173, I snatched it up. (at Digital Society, auth. dealer, 60 E10th @ B'way...they had 5 or 6 left if anyone cares)
I got the new-old Nano home, charged it up, filled it, and started playing music. I hadn't used my previous Nano since getting the Classic, so I had forgotten what it was like. I was floored at how much smoother it operated compared to the Classic. The menus fly, the wheel responds the millisecond you touch it. It's what an iPod experience should be. On the Classic, I have to rub the wheel about 5 times to wake it up. Most of the time I give up and just click the center button. I always have the sense that I'm coaxing the Classic to do what I want, and waiting while it ponders the notion.
As others have written, I find the Classic beyond sluggish, bloated with near useless eye candy, and lacking the basic level of touch sensitivity that has been present in every iPod preceding it. In its current firmware state, I pretty much hate the Classic. But it's 160GB. I have every song I own on it, and still have about 70 gigs free. That has been the sole mitigating factor keeping me from returning it. The 160GB Classic is like the big dumb ox you're friends with in college because he can lift a full keg over his head.
I won't touch on the Nano's sound quality vs. the Classic. Many will argue inferiority on the Classic's part. In a bustling crowded city, they both sound pretty great to me.
I will say that in the 3 short weeks I've owned it, I have been spoiled by the screen quality of the Classic. The Nano screen is dimmer, yellowish and the fonts are fuzzy by comparison.
Otherwise, I'm truly baffled as to how the Classic passed QC at Cupertino. Something is seriously amiss at Apple these days. Viva la Nano!

Answer 1

Considerations are capacity, price, screen size, lifestyle, known issues.
How big is your music/media library? The Classic has a max capacity of 160GB vs the Nano 16GB,  some people use the classic as a Music datastore, which I think is not a good idea, as there are hundreds if not thousands of reported iPod hardisk crash, and some people erase the music library in their PC, thinking that the iPod classic is sturdy and reliable. (just read these discussion on Sync issue)
Price - Nano is half the price of the Classic.
Screen size - Nano screen is too small for video
Nano has FM Radio.
Battery life (when new) - Classic has about 40 hours of continuos music per full charge, where Nano has about 24 hours of continuos music.
Nano has no moving parts, hence more sturdy and reliable.
However if you want a sturdy device, with big screen, and more functionality, get  the iPod Touch, it is double the cost of the Nano if you get the 32GB Touch.
For better comparison, read this Apple specs