For people who would bother to come to a web forum about headphones, then the cost really isn't that much more. For the average person looking to improve their computer or smartphone experience they will say "that cost more than Beats headphones!" The nano is still something people might be willing to snag to go with their iPhone.
I have been following the micro thread pretty closely, and what I haven't completely gathered yet is if the micro will actually perform better purely as a DAC over the nano iDSD. It seems like it uses the same software and hardware. It does have a volume and effects bypass and I suppose details of implementation will be better or more ideal. But I am wondering if as a standalone DAC it will really be significantly better over the nano vs just having more features.
I agree with you...the fact is that from a
certain point, in order to achieve small "benefits" in sound, you must pay LOT of money...not to mention that the rest of the setup must be able to reveal the changes we have made in dacs or cables....but...
but, the way I see it, with modern technology used and research in the field of "dacs", the progress is so fast compared with models made in previous years, that I am not willing to spent thousand of dollars or euros, for the top-notch dacs, which after a small period of time are considered to be "out of date"..
I want to be able to maintain a "balance", between good sound and money spent...I am not rich...I m an average user, have an average system and want with the budget I have, to "buy" the best I can..
moreover, I believe the majority of us, consider "the chase of good sound" as a hobby...so, I want this "balance" in money spend, to allow me to continue this hobby, and be able to buy and try new technologies, mainly in dacs...well, I will speak only for dacs here...
other people have different opinion and method in the "pursue" of "good sound"...
they wait until the can buy the best dac, costing hundred of dollars and keep it for long period of time, as they consider that if the dac is designed in specific major areas, correctly, then differences in the supported files (pcm, dsd etc), have little to add in the final sound of the device...to sum up, they claim that a very-very good, and as a result, very-very expensive dac, can have better sound when playing even "decent" 44/16 bits (but well recorded) files, compared to an "average" dac, which can play everything you can throw at it...so they keep their expensive dac, and dont bother if it can support dsd, dxd, etc...they examine only the design of the dac..
I, also examine the design of the dac...but I have to make some compromises cause of the limits of my budget...so I check the "design" but also the features of the dac...so, can an "average" and "decent designed" dac, which supports many hi-rez files and has many features, allow me, to "catch" the performance level of a high-end dac?...don't know...probably it can't
and which "method" is more correct?...who is spending more money, at the end of the day?...me, or the "high-end fellow" ? that, don;t know either...
but as I mentioned, I see it as a hobby...and because I see it as a hobby, I want to be able to buy and try different things-technologies, within the limits of my budget...to "evolve" my hobby..
as a result, I have chosen to stay in the hobby, as an "average user" and try "average equipment" in my setup, equipment that I can easilly change if I want to, than spending thousand of dollars-euros in top-notch equipment and keeping it for 5 or more years...I will be bored to tell you the truth
you can say, I am materialistic...probably
I mean after 5 years you may be still keeping the audio equipment but chances are, you will upgrade it after some time. Head-Fi virus is fully installed in us, not even the best anti virus can protect you from that but you, your self control (but Head-Fi lowers it when it comes to audio 
) 
