My first post, and I'm a long-winded SOB.
A 64GB Nano with Wifi, Bluetooth, Internal speaker and more powerful Apps? But nobody wants it thicker is my guess (I don't think Apple wants it much thicker either)
Space is at a premium. By ditching the headphone jack entirely, they could save room, plus miniaturization is always marching forward... so here's my look:
speaker
For alerts? What alerts? Presumably you have a phone, which undoubtedly does it better. If you're thinking "sync Nano to phone, check alerts on your wrist without pulling out phone" then you'd have TWO devices ringing.
Save the space. Speaker is not a high priority, and likely stillborn is my guess.
* maybe just for the sake of full watch functionality, what with it's Nike+ features... getting diff sounds for every 1/4, 1/2 and mile maybe, or countdowns, etc.
Apps
I'm sure the software will evolve, but I'm not expecting any drastic changes in processing power to carry more involved apps. This is still wristwatch territory... we're not playing iTouch games on it. Price and battery life will likely keep this quite restrained. We can't be needing to charge our watch twice during the day.
64gb
Not gonna happen. Space + $ and not wanting to impinge on iTouch, which is an entry-point to App-store revenues (even with Nano apps... the $ won't be nearly the same). Can't get to 8GB Touch price, limiting it to maybe $180 tops in my estimation. They have $30 of room to bump the price, and unless they forgo other upgrades I don't forsee even 32GB, especially if we want...
Bluetooth!
The only likely upgrade I see, besides software (and maybe speaker, as I said above). It opens up TWO major improvements in function.
1)wrist-mounted music player w no wires (already available using plug-ins --> in fact would be best if they integrated the "apt-X" tech the Jaybirds plug-in uses, to retain sound Q with the switch to wireless)
2) potential to Bluetooth sync with phone. Slaved to the phone, it could be a wrist-mounted remote interface (battery life dependent, of course)
Bluetooth is just plain logical. I actually decided the current model wasn't for me precisely because it can't go cordless without a plug-in. BT4.0 doesn't mean low-energy for everything though; the battery is gonna suffer or have to grow. Low-energy (BLE) is ONE mode of BT4.0, intended for very low power applications like heart rate monitors, and is NOT voice/music capable. Your BT headphones will still be running A2DP, though power-consumption is ever improving.
Wifi
With space, battery life, and cost concerns, I think this is low-priority. It's a tiny device and dropping it in a cradle (it's gotta charge anyway) is no big.
Magnetometer
A compass on your wrist would be great if your iPhone was sending your GPS directions to your nano. Look at your wrist, read the directions, look at the arrow. Phone stays in pocket. Small and cheap enough to make it in?
As a comparison... the WIMM has all of these except a speaker and big storage space.
-More processing power (for bigger apps)
-BT and Wifi
-Magnetometer (and accelerometer, which Nano already has)
BUT
-has only 2GB, is much thicker
-no headphone jack
-made of plastic
It's available for Developers at $200. Will it be cheaper when it's consumer ready? Doubtful, at least with those specs plus decent storage.
Certainly with greatly expanded storage (8GB+), aluminum construction, and a premium Apple price, a WIMM-style Nano is going to be bigger than the current Nano (maybe substantially), and there's no way it's under $200.
so in IMO...
Software evolution is an obvious must, and is probably a given
An internal speaker may be doable (these first two will give full watch/alarm clock/stopwatch functionality)
But I think we should really just be hoping for Bluetooth that can run high quality audio and a heart rate monitor simultaneously.
I think that this ONE addition can add an enormous amount not only to the Nano as a device, but also expand the iPhone as a tool. Once price is taken into account, asking for anything else is just pie-in-the-sky wish-list. Considering the functionality and experience they seem to be aiming at, I think they'll likely forgo Wifi and power/storage gains to save $, space and battery life.
Oh but I wish for USB3.0 transfer speeds on all iToys anyway (can they write fast enough to take advantage though?)