PDA

View Full Version : Touch CAPACITY - Why Doesn't Anyone CARE?




Tones2
Sep 1, 2010, 10:55 AM
It used to be that the introduction of new iPods was all ABOUT capacity. Now no one seems to care. Strange. I've had an 160 GB iPod Classic for years now. I had an iPod with a 60Gb capacity I think like 5 years ago. Now, the Touch STILL is going to top out at 64GB.

I DO understand that it's impossible to go over 64GB at the current flash prices, but what I don't understand is why no one seems to CARE. :confused:

With so many people using there phones as music players these days - something that you always have with you, it's hard to understand why anyone even WANTS yet another relatively low capacity music player like the Touch to also carry around. Baffling really. The only way I'd consider a seperate music player is it it had SIGNIFICANTLY more capacity. Otherwise, I'll just use my 32GB iPhone and keep my iPod Classic.

BTW - What do you think will happen to the iPod Classic. Any updates on it?

Tony



skiltrip
Sep 1, 2010, 10:59 AM
It used to be that the introduction of new iPods was all ABOUT capacity. Now no one seems to care. Strange. I've had an 160 GB iPod Classic for years now. I had an iPod with a 60Gb capacity I think like 5 years ago. Now, the Touch STILL is going to top out at 64GB.

I DO understand that it's impossible to go over 64GB at the current flash prices, but what I don't understand is why no one seems to CARE. :confused:

With so many people using there phones as music players these days - something that you always have with you, it's hard to understand why anyone even WANTS yet another relatively low capacity music player like the Touch to also carry around. Baffling really. The only way I'd consider a seperate music player is it it had SIGNIFICANTLY more capacity. Otherwise, I'll just use my 32GB iPhone and keep my iPod Classic.

BTW - What do you think will happen to the iPod Classic. Any updates on it?

Tony

I think we do care, it's just a matter of "nothing you can do about it". Prices dictate how these things unfold. I think the other thing is, 64GB is a very feasible amount of memory for most people. Even people with huge music collections. Personally, I have a 32GB touch, and my full music collection is around 55GB, but I manage to make it work. People can make 64GB work even more easily.

So, yeah, we care, everyone wants more storage, it's all about storage. But you have to choose when to give up the fight as to not make yourself crazy. And think that explains the lack of "why not 128GB!?" threads.

Link2999
Sep 1, 2010, 11:05 AM
I honestly don't care. Maybe if I had that much music (Seems almost impossible for me). I think people just want the bigger sizes, not because they use it all, but because it's the top model.

Tones2
Sep 1, 2010, 11:05 AM
I think we do care, it's just a matter of "nothing you can do about it". Prices dictate how these things unfold. I think the other thing is, 64GB is a very feasible amount of memory for most people. Even people with huge music collections. Personally, I have a 32GB touch, and my full music collection is around 55GB, but I manage to make it work. People can make 64GB work even more easily.

So, yeah, we care, everyone wants more storage, it's all about storage. But you have to choose when to give up the fight as to not make yourself crazy. And think that explains the lack of "why not 128GB!?" threads.

But given that most people can put 32GB on most phones in some way, and that all smart phones have music players, what's the market for a 64GB music player? It's not that much different to warrant carrying around yet another device. Those with large libraries would still have to "manage" those libraries - the main advantage of having large capacities is not to have to do that. Those with smaller libaries can probably just use their phone.

I'm sure there are a small percentage of music lovers without phones, but man, the market for something like an iPod Touch is really going to dwindle soon if they don't increase capacity.

Tony

Tones2
Sep 1, 2010, 11:06 AM
I honestly don't care. Maybe if I had that much music (Seems almost impossible for me). I think people just want the bigger sizes, not because they use it all, but because it's the top model.

You must be young. Us older people have a LOT more music / videos. My library is like 250GB+, about which 120GB is music and the rest video. Most people I know have similar libraries. It's definitely NOT about having the top model - it's about what best my library will fit into.

Tony

Link2999
Sep 1, 2010, 11:14 AM
You must be young. Us older people have a LOT more music / videos. My library is like 250GB+, about which 120GB is music and the rest video. Most people I know have similar libraries. It's definitely NOT about having the top model - it's about what best my library will fit into.

Tony

Yea, I'm 18, have a 40gb library. I do agree with you though, I'm just saying that most people I know buy the top capacity because it's the top model. In my opinion it's just a dumb thing to do. (Most people I know have a 10gb or less library :p)

Beric
Sep 1, 2010, 11:16 AM
I'm annoyed, just because I'll probably have to buy the most expensive model.

Not much I can do about it though.

Ivan P
Sep 1, 2010, 11:17 AM
I'd say the main factor is production costs vs profit.

Only last year did it become feasible for Apple to ramp up production of a 64GB touch, because the prices of 32GB flash chips had come down considerably when compared to the year before (the 64GB uses two 32GB chips, hence the memory costs twice as much for Apple to purchase, which must then be passed to the consumer). This is why the 32GB touch took the pricing of the old 16GB model, while the 64GB took the price of the old 32GB. Now, even though people would love a 128GB touch, this is where things get tricky; right now it is still unfeasible for Apple to produce a touch that uses two 64GB chips due to the massive costs it would pass onto the consumer (the original 32GB 1st gen was insanely expensive, from what I remember even more expensive than the current low-end iPad), but it is also unfeasible to use four 32GB chips even though they are considerably cheaper - Apple is obsessed with thinness, and making their devices thicker (which is necessary to use more than two NAND flash chips) isn't on the agenda for them.

Sure, there are people that would buy the 128GB touch were it offered, but it's cost would have a major impact on its sales (and Apple is known to axe poor-selling iPods - hence the reason why the original 160GB classic was axed when the 120GB was released a couple years back). I'd say next year at the earliest for a 128GB touch.

skiltrip
Sep 1, 2010, 11:20 AM
But given that most people can put 32GB on most phones in some way, and that all smart phones have music players, what's the market for a 64GB music player? It's not that much different to warrant carrying around yet another device. Those with large libraries would still have to "manage" those libraries - the main advantage of having large capacities is not to have to do that. Those with smaller libaries can probably just use their phone.

I'm sure there are a small percentage of music lovers without phones, but man, the market for something like an iPod Touch is really going to dwindle soon if they don't increase capacity.

Tony

This is why I also own a 160GB Classic. I HATE managing my library, so I'm with ya there. While my Classic has everything and anything on it, including holiday music, and my daughter's children's music, my Touch has everything I'd normally want to listen to.

That said, I really use my Touch as a different kind of device. I use it as an internet tool, organizational tool, gaming device, time killer, general entertainment usage. And it happens to play music too.

If you're someone who uses your Touch as a primary music device, I hear ya. 128GB or bust!

Tones2
Sep 1, 2010, 11:51 AM
but it is also unfeasible to use four 32GB chips even though they are considerably cheaper - Apple is obsessed with thinness, and making their devices thicker (which is necessary to use more than two NAND flash chips) isn't on the agenda for them.

Yeah, that's the problem. It used to be that the larger capacity pre-Touch iPoda were THICKER, and that seemed to be a reasonable trade off between those who want capacity and price. Heck, I don't CARE if my 128GB Touch is thicker than the 64GB Touch, nor would most peple care who want this capacity. It'd still probably be thinner than the 160GB Classic, so they could then discontinue THAT. It's seems to be win-win here. :confused:

Tony

tomjleeds
Sep 1, 2010, 12:25 PM
But given that most people can put 32GB on most phones in some way, and that all smart phones have music players, what's the market for a 64GB music player? It's not that much different to warrant carrying around yet another device. Those with large libraries would still have to "manage" those libraries - the main advantage of having large capacities is not to have to do that. Those with smaller libaries can probably just use their phone.

I'm sure there are a small percentage of music lovers without phones, but man, the market for something like an iPod Touch is really going to dwindle soon if they don't increase capacity.

Tony

Er...I'm not one of them, but some people like having two devices.

Carouser
Sep 1, 2010, 12:43 PM
I DO understand that it's impossible to go over 64GB at the current flash prices, but what I don't understand is why no one seems to CARE. :confused:

If it's impossible, what are people who do care supposed to do about it? Whine that something which is impossible isn't possible? :rolleyes:

the market for something like an iPod Touch is really going to dwindle soon if they don't increase capacity.

I'll take that bet.

parafish13
Sep 1, 2010, 01:04 PM
I used to whine like so many of you are...

and then, as a poor college student, I bought myself an 8GB first-gen Touch to replace my much-larger iPod Video.

And you know what? I was happy.

I realized that I use my Macbook (gasp) more than...once every few days!

And that, even with 8GB plus apps and more, I can put enough music on my Touch to remain happy! And if i'm unhappy, I can change the music in (gasp) five minutes!

My library is as huge as anyone's, but for reals, it doesn't all have to be there with me wherever I go. Are any of us moving to a laptopless hideout in Antarctica? Didn't think so.

We're talking about digital music access in 2010. We can survive a day with 64GB (or 32 or 8).

Tones2
Sep 1, 2010, 01:37 PM
I used to whine like so many of you are...

and then, as a poor college student, I bought myself an 8GB first-gen Touch to replace my much-larger iPod Video.

And you know what? I was happy.

I realized that I use my Macbook (gasp) more than...once every few days!

And that, even with 8GB plus apps and more, I can put enough music on my Touch to remain happy! And if i'm unhappy, I can change the music in (gasp) five minutes!

My library is as huge as anyone's, but for reals, it doesn't all have to be there with me wherever I go. Are any of us moving to a laptopless hideout in Antarctica? Didn't think so.

We're talking about digital music access in 2010. We can survive a day with 64GB (or 32 or 8).

This is a really tired old argument.:rolleyes: Some of us don't want to have to PRE-DECIDE what we want to listen to each day. I have NO IDEA usually. So when I'm out and think of something I want to listen to, I want it on my device. I would like that device to be my 128GB iPhone :), but I'll settle for a 2nd device if I had to. but 64GB doesn't do anything for me. So I'll carry my Classic, thank you. The only reason I would care about the Touch if it matched by Classic in capacity or at least came close, then I could replace it with something I can actually watch movies on comfortably.

Tony

churchrd
Sep 1, 2010, 01:41 PM
OP,
Don't forget too that, we're going to see a shift to cloud streaming for media in the near future. I think right now, you could put your itunes catalog on a mobile me account and stream it to your Iphone. Other apps and companies like Rhapsody, Audio Box, even Pandora, are making it so you don't need 1TB of storage to carry your catalog around with you physically. It'll be in the cloud.

Tones2
Sep 1, 2010, 01:46 PM
If it's impossible, what are people who do care supposed to do about it? Whine that something which is impossible isn't possible? :rolleyes:


Well, it IS possible. Make it THICKER and put four 32GB chips in it at a reasonable cost. It would probably still be thinner than the Classic. I'm not sure what the thinnest obsession is with Apple over the last 3 years.

Tony

Carouser
Sep 1, 2010, 01:47 PM
This is a really tired old argument.:rolleyes:

Complaining about capacity, however, is fresh and innovative.

Shifty88
Sep 1, 2010, 01:49 PM
My music collection is probably like 20gb. And 95% of that I don't even care to listen to anymore, so I don't need it with me at all times.

It's really movies and TV shows that eat up the space on my tiny, 1st gen iPod touch.

Tones2
Sep 1, 2010, 01:50 PM
OP,
Don't forget too that, we're going to see a shift to cloud streaming for media in the near future. I think right now, you could put your itunes catalog on a mobile me account and stream it to your Iphone. Other apps and companies like Rhapsody, Audio Box, even Pandora, are making it so you don't need 1TB of storage to carry your catalog around with you physically. It'll be in the cloud.


Well, remember that at the same time, cell carriers are putting substantial streaming limitations on accounts. I listen to about 4-6 hours a music as well as video a DAY - I would easily exceed those limits. Plus, Rhapsody and the like catalogue is not that comprehensive when you get away from mainstream stuff. Lastly, I like to view lyrics that I have embeded in my music files which you can't do with cloud based streaming.

No, I just want the same capacity as the iPod I bought 4 years ago. I don;t think that's an unreasonable expectation.

Tony

parafish13
Sep 1, 2010, 01:51 PM
Tony,

If you need some recommendations for <64GB of music to get you through any given day, I can help you get started. You can fit the entire Eno discography there, for starters!

I'll leave this thread now.

-Miro

Tones2
Sep 1, 2010, 01:51 PM
Complaining about capacity, however, is fresh and innovative.

Well, yes it is, because we've taken a step BACKWARDS only recently. And it's the first year that Apple has NOT increased capacity in ANY of their devices.

Tony

ucfgrad93
Sep 1, 2010, 01:53 PM
I have to say I was surprised that there was no 128GB iPod Touch introduced today. I would have to say that the prices are still to high.

My music library is 60GB and I have a 16GB iPhone 4. Personally, I don't need to carry 10.5 days of music with me everywhere I go. So I don't mind having to manage my music.

Tmacfan4321
Sep 1, 2010, 01:54 PM
This is a really tired old argument.:rolleyes: Some of us don't want to have to PRE-DECIDE what we want to listen to each day. I have NO IDEA usually. So when I'm out and think of something I want to listen to, I want it on my device. I would like that device to be my 128GB iPhone :), but I'll settle for a 2nd device if I had to. but 64GB doesn't do anything for me. So I'll carry my Classic, thank you. The only reason I would care about the Touch if it matched by Classic in capacity or at least came close, then I could replace it with something I can actually watch movies on comfortably.

TonyThe fact stands that the vast majority of Apple's consumers do not have more than 64GB of music. Apple doesn't see the need to make a 128GB touch work. There is very little demand for that device.

Carouser
Sep 1, 2010, 01:57 PM
Tmacfan4321 gave you the answer why nobody cares: It's not worth it (financially or otherwise) to try to meet your expectations. Nobody cares because it's a dumb thing to care about. If you want to take your whole library with you, buy (or keep) the Classic. I'm not sure what kind of answer you want, besides people to validate your grievance?

Tones2
Sep 1, 2010, 01:59 PM
The fact stands that the vast majority of Apple's consumers do not have more than 64GB of music. Apple doesn't see the need to make a 128GB touch work. There is very little demand for that device.

That's YOUR Perspective. You are probably under 21 and thinking of YOUR friends. Most people that I know want higher capacity, not just for music but HD video. You don't hear an outcry because the iPod Classic STILL exists, fortunately. I think Apple is just bidding time under 64GB flash chips become cheaper and more available. They can still fall back on the Classic for now.

Remember, Apple USED to make 120 & 160 iPods exclusively as a key selling point before the Touches came out, so SOMEBODY must have wanted this!

Tony

ucfgrad93
Sep 1, 2010, 02:06 PM
Remember, Apple USED to make 120 & 160 iPods exclusively as a key selling point before the Touches came out, so SOMEBODY must have wanted this!

Tony

No doubt that there are some people who want this. The key is being able to provide it in a way that will make Apple money. The iPod classics have a harddrive in them and this kind of storage is much cheaper than flash storage.

I think that there are 2 possibilities on why Apple hasn't released a 128GB iPod Touch.

1. They would have to raise the price of the 128GB iPod Touch to a point where Apple believes that not many people would buy them.

2. Keep the sale price of the iPod Touch at $399, however, it would so severely cut into the margins that it is not worth it.

megamanbnmaster
Sep 1, 2010, 02:12 PM
So if they release a 128gb iPod touch for $599, would you buy it?

There's a whole socioeconomic factor of price vs demand. For the general consumer (as pointed out by the plethora releases of iPods within a certain rage of price), $399 seems to be the maximum price people would pay for an MP3 Player without feeling that they're getting ripped off. If Apple sold a 128gb iPod touch (thicker than the current of course), you can bet your ass it would be a minimum of $499. With a 500 dollar maximum the general population would develop an economic feel that the iPod touch is too expensive, even though there are cheaper priced ones at the lower end.

Don't forget, Apple is targeting the general audience for the maximum profit. If the 8GB iPod touch was still $199, then the general consumer would rather pay the extra $50 and nobody would get a 8GB iPod nano. They format prices and memory ranges to set up the maximum profit.

Although the iPod Classic is one of the worst selling iPods these days, they are still providing the iPod classic as a way to appeal to those with big libraries. But the amount of people with big libraries are still microscopic compare to the general populous.

Apple analysts know what they're doing. They learned their lesson about cost from the first iPhone. Until memory modules become cheaper, they can't expand on the memory unit.

Plus, if it does go down next year, then they'll have one more thing to offer.

TheIntruder
Sep 1, 2010, 02:14 PM
People care. Obviously, you do.

The problem is that there aren't enough of them, combined with the other factors, to form a compelling business case at this point.

elie.fares
Sep 1, 2010, 02:32 PM
Well, honestly, 16GB of space on my iPhone is more than enough. I don't think you'll have enough time to listen to all the music and watch all the movies that 64 GB can contain. So I'd rather have my own little playlists with the things that I like to listen to the most on the go, rather than my whole library.

Zepaw
Sep 1, 2010, 03:22 PM
If I added every song, podcast, and video in my iTunes to my iPod I would still have 20+ GB left over in the 64GB version.

Tones2
Sep 1, 2010, 03:47 PM
I love how people with small libraries just list that they have small libraries such that that's somehow relevant to the argument that others with large libraries might want more capacity.:rolleyes:

Tony

SonGoku v2.5
Sep 1, 2010, 03:53 PM
Isn't next year the 10th anniversary of the original iPod? I think it'd actually be a cool time to finally phase out the classic line, but only if the price on flash memory comes down to where they could actually sell a 128GB Touch at a price point less than $500.

If Apple really didn't care about users like us who need higher capacity they probably would have killed off the classic anyway and limited the Touch and iPad at 32GB to match the iPhone's capacity, but they didn't...so I honestly believe that we'll have a higher end Touch within the next two years, and hopefully a 64GB iPhone as well.

Black Belt
Sep 1, 2010, 04:20 PM
Totally agreed! If I could get a Terrabyte iPod, that would start to be a reasonable amount of storage. There are lots of things that an iPod could be used for if it actually had memory - like a small device to download your Raw images to from your Nikon in the field while on vacation. 64 Gigs is just one roll of RAW pictures - just to put the pathetic amount on the iPod Touch into perspective. And having to "manage" my library is stupid. I realize most Apple users don't have much to do, but the 95% of people who actually own iPods are Windows users and dealing with iTunes as little as possible is the key to happiness and time management. I remember when Apple products came with so much memory you would go WTF! and be happy later on that it did. Now it's the opposite.

Ipodize
Sep 1, 2010, 04:21 PM
It used to be that the introduction of new iPods was all ABOUT capacity. Now no one seems to care.

Its a new apple product. :D
We're all focusing on the cameras, retina display, and all the other things Apple granted us, instead of looking at the negative aspects of it. :D

Black Belt
Sep 1, 2010, 04:21 PM
If I added every song, podcast, and video in my iTunes to my iPod I would still have 20+ GB left over in the 64GB version.

Your library sucks.

Beric
Sep 1, 2010, 04:21 PM
I'll be getting a 32GB because of the cost.

Would have liked a 64GB though, but I just can't afford an extra $100 just to make it so I have to sync less often.

Tones2
Sep 1, 2010, 05:03 PM
Totally agreed! If I could get a Terrabyte iPod, that would start to be a reasonable amount of storage. There are lots of things that an iPod could be used for if it actually had memory - like a small device to download your Raw images to from your Nikon in the field while on vacation. 64 Gigs is just one roll of RAW pictures - just to put the pathetic amount on the iPod Touch into perspective. And having to "manage" my library is stupid. I realize most Apple users don't have much to do, but the 95% of people who actually own iPods are Windows users and dealing with iTunes as little as possible is the key to happiness and time management. I remember when Apple products came with so much memory you would go WTF! and be happy later on that it did. Now it's the opposite.

Yeah, I want a terrabyte iPHONE!

Tony

ucfgrad93
Sep 1, 2010, 05:07 PM
Totally agreed! If I could get a Terrabyte iPod, that would start to be a reasonable amount of storage.

And what pray tell would Apple sell it for?

Carouser
Sep 1, 2010, 05:37 PM
I love how people with small libraries just list that they have small libraries such that that's somehow relevant to the argument that others with large libraries might want more capacity.

That's not an argument, it's just something you want. We get that you want it, but there's good reasons why it's not offered, so, uh, lmao

Carouser
Sep 1, 2010, 05:39 PM
64 Gigs is just one roll of RAW pictures - just to put the pathetic amount on the iPod Touch into perspective

Yes, if you want the iPod to hold a ton of RAW pictures then it looks like it has awfully small storage. Also, I can't get my drinking glass to hold a swimming pool's worth of water. What's up with that?

Black Belt
Sep 1, 2010, 05:47 PM
Yes, if you want the iPod to hold a ton of RAW pictures then it looks like it has awfully small storage. Also, I can't get my drinking glass to hold a swimming pool's worth of water. What's up with that?

My comparison has a useful scenario, yours does not. I guess I have to point out stupid things like that in this forum.

Black Belt
Sep 1, 2010, 05:48 PM
And what pray tell would Apple sell it for?

Whatever Jobs could squeeze out of me. Maybe they should loosen up on their ridiculous fetish for stupidly expensive memory and thinness.

alphaone
Sep 1, 2010, 06:14 PM
This is why I was really hoping for a price drop on the touch and/or a price drop on the classic. I'm tired of having -10GB of space available on my 16GB G2 Touch. I really wanted to get something new with more space and I was hoping for a lower price also. I realize the form factors are different but when I can find a 128GB 2.5" SSD drive for ~$220 and a 1TB 2.5" HD for ~$120 I find it hard to believe that they still need to charge us $250 for a 160GB classic and $300 for a 32GB touch. I mean really? Come on.. (especially the classic)

If I'm off base here I'd love to hear it. Would probably help me feel better. Right now I'm tooling around ebay looking for a used 6th gen classic, but I am concerned about the battery life in these used ipods.

miles01110
Sep 1, 2010, 06:23 PM
But given that most people can put 32GB on most phones in some way, and that all smart phones have music players, what's the market for a 64GB music player?

Some people don't want or need to pay a contract fee for a music player. Duh?

I'm sure there are a small percentage of music lovers without phones, but man, the market for something like an iPod Touch is really going to dwindle soon if they don't increase capacity.


I don't think so. The iPod touch has been a big seller for a number of quarters now.

You must be young. Us older people have a LOT more music / videos. My library is like 250GB+, about which 120GB is music and the rest video. Most people I know have similar libraries. It's definitely NOT about having the top model - it's about what best my library will fit into.


Apple, like any other company without a monopoly on a high-end market, does not cater to outliers with large libraries like you.

This is a really tired old argument.:rolleyes: Some of us don't want to have to PRE-DECIDE what we want to listen to each day.

This is a pretty tired argument too, you know. Deal with the inconvenience, or just have your entire day ruined because you couldn't listen to that one Johnny Cash song you didn't have room for on your 160 GB iPod. Perhaps some slow violin music would be more appropriate.

I love how people with small libraries just list that they have small libraries such that that's somehow relevant to the argument that others with large libraries might want more capacity.:rolleyes:


I love how people with large libraries just list that they have large libraries such that it's somehow relevant to the argument that others with small libraries might not want more capacity. :rolleyes:

If you think about the economics of the situation it makes more sense.

Carouser
Sep 1, 2010, 06:45 PM
My comparison has a useful scenario, yours does not. I guess I have to point out stupid things like that in this forum.

You're right, the Apple design squad should have said 'hey some shadetree photographer can't handle his memory properly when he takes a trip, let's not release the iPod unless you can use it as a place to dump RAW images', totally reasonable.

jmor
Sep 1, 2010, 08:00 PM
I've been disappointed that apple has not upped the capacity of the touches or phones this year. I think that the lowest end touch is way to expensive, and I also believe that the nanos are overpriced. So with that I guess it would have to be more expensive and that would be worse as well, so I want lower, if not the same, prices for much larger capacity. So yes, I want it but I guess we just have to wait and see and hope.

OllyW
Sep 1, 2010, 08:05 PM
I've been disappointed that apple has not upped the capacity of the touches or phones this year. I think that the lowest end touch is way to expensive, and I also believe that the nanos are overpriced. So with that I guess it would have to be more expensive and that would be worse as well, so I want lower, if not the same, prices for much larger capacity. So yes, I want it but I guess we just have to wait and see and hope.

Flash memory is currently running at high prices. Even Apple can't do anything to change this.

Tmacfan4321
Sep 1, 2010, 08:34 PM
A terabyte worth of flash? Are you people kidding me?

You guys must have no grasp of where technology is at in its current form. SSDs aren't even up to 600GB capacity yet. Laptop HDDs just hit 1TB a little while ago.

To everyone who wants a 128GB iPod touch/iPhone, please send emails to Apple directly. Let them know that demand for this device is real!

Zay1993
Sep 2, 2010, 12:50 AM
But given that most people can put 32GB on most phones in some way, and that all smart phones have music players, what's the market for a 64GB music player? It's not that much different to warrant carrying around yet another device. Those with large libraries would still have to "manage" those libraries - the main advantage of having large capacities is not to have to do that. Those with smaller libaries can probably just use their phone.

I'm sure there are a small percentage of music lovers without phones, but man, the market for something like an iPod Touch is really going to dwindle soon if they don't increase capacity.

Tony

I personally prefer carrying around my phone and iPod. I don't wanna kill my phones battery by listening to music on it all day, I use my phone to text, surf the web and make quick calls. Even if I had an iPhone I would still only use it as a phone and keep music on it only as a backup for when my iPod runs out of battery. It's just one more device, no big deal to me.

Then again I'm sure a lot of your opinions differ from mine. Just thought I'd put my opinion out there.

tubemonkey
Sep 2, 2010, 12:57 AM
I'm not sure what the thinnest obsession is with Apple over the last 3 years.

I know. For some reason, Steve is obsessed with it.

tubemonkey
Sep 2, 2010, 01:04 AM
I love how people with small libraries just list that they have small libraries such that that's somehow relevant to the argument that others with large libraries might want more capacity.:rolleyes:

Tony

LOL :D

You're doing a great job in this thread. You clearly make the most sense.

alphaone
Sep 2, 2010, 01:06 AM
A terabyte worth of flash? Are you people kidding me?

You guys must have no grasp of where technology is at in its current form. SSDs aren't even up to 600GB capacity yet. Laptop HDDs just hit 1TB a little while ago.

To everyone who wants a 128GB iPod touch/iPhone, please send emails to Apple directly. Let them know that demand for this device is real!

Are you referring to my post with the 1TB of flash comment? If so, in that instance I was talking about regular magnetic hard drives and making a comparison on how all ipod touches and the classic are overpriced IMO right now.

The point I was trying to make is that I'm ok with the storage capacity, sure you can never have too much, but the real problem is the cost. If the price of these items were ~$100 less I (and many others I know) would probably be sold on the spot on the product. But otherwise, I'm sorry, but I just can't justify the cost for just a music/video player and wifi capable device (for the record I got my current ipod touch as part of the free ipod for students with a new computer deal). However, if it had data capability e.g. 3G, I would give it quite a bit more than a passing glance and a scowl.

That's my dilemma actually. I'm at a point where because of my current job a smartphone like the iphone or an android phone would be very beneficial to me both from a work productivity perspective and a personal use perspective (I'm out in the field for more than half of the year). Maybe it's time for me to move away from just plain ipods. But I use and like verizon so the only route to go is an android phone + microSD expansion. So I guess there you go. About the same cost as a 32GB new ipod touch, but with data, not to mention talk.



And referring to Zay1993's post above that is a valid argument and I think a lot of people feel that way, but for me that's basically double the cost and another very valuable thing to get lost, stolen or broken.

tubemonkey
Sep 2, 2010, 01:15 AM
Apple, like any other company without a monopoly on a high-end market, does not cater to outliers with large libraries like you.

It used to. That was their big feature for the hard drive players. Have people's habits changed that dramatically in the transition to flash storage? Did their libraries shrink? Why is storage no longer that important?

ReallyBigFeet
Sep 2, 2010, 06:55 AM
You must be young. Us older people have a LOT more music / videos. My library is like 250GB+, about which 120GB is music and the rest video. Most people I know have similar libraries. It's definitely NOT about having the top model - it's about what best my library will fit into.

Tony

I have almost 200 gigs in music and well over 30 TERAbytes in video content.

But this is on my home NAS. I think the reason I (and perhaps others) don't care about having 200+ gigs of storage on our iPods is that we don't feel the NEED to carry our entire library with us at all times. You do, for whatever reason, so I can see why this is relevant to you.

To the average iOwner, your library is your library, stored on your main computing device or network. The iPod is not your library....just a media player.

miles01110
Sep 2, 2010, 07:09 AM
It used to. That was their big feature for the hard drive players.

Yes, it used to.

Have people's habits changed that dramatically in the transition to flash storage? Did their libraries shrink? Why is storage no longer that important?

Because Apple says it's not. Just like Apple says you don't need an i* processor until 6 months after it comes out. Just like Apple says you need to hold it differently or use a case. If you don't like what Apple says you need, don't buy an Apple product. This is not new.

tubemonkey
Sep 2, 2010, 07:20 AM
If you don't like what Apple says you need, don't buy an Apple product.

That's exactly what I do. I don't own any Apple products and probably never will.

allblur
Sep 2, 2010, 07:21 AM
It used to. That was their big feature for the hard drive players. Have people's habits changed that dramatically in the transition to flash storage? Did their libraries shrink? Why is storage no longer that important?

I blame it on fame, it wasn't until the iphone came out that we saw ipod touches, since then the transition from capacity to visuality had begun. The only reason people need big capacities now is because we're wanting to put everything and anything in our portable media players, I mean what would the point be if you had an mp3 player that plays music, video, takes photos, downloads games, podcasts and lasts for 40 hours, I doubt people have the to go home and sit in front of their computer all night trying to organize their playlists or movies they haven't seen, especially converting the movie formats from your dvd. And as mentioned before majority of ipod users are windows users so itunes ends up being the program least likely too be opened. You say we can't be bothered yet next time you get frustrated over that photo you wanted to show someone, or that song I have stuck in your head but can't recall properly or even just a simple song you had to give up since new ones are popping up like weeds over the net, don't you dare complain about not having enough space, don't you complain about having it but just not on your ipod, because people with larger libraries spend far more time looking after each song, checking the covers and albums names. It does matter, and think, if english songs are able to fill 50gbs what about people who understands other languages, there are many other genres out there and each genre contains their own 50gbs of mystic, if we knew at least two each, that already surpasses the 64gbs, to me 64gbs would only be enough for my playlist my whole library would need 250gbs at the least. And that doesn't include movies or games!

jeffy.dee-lux
Sep 2, 2010, 07:58 AM
Look, I'm always the one rolling my eyes at the people who complain about how Apple didn't come out with the product they were hoping for, but this case is a little different. For years there was a steady progression towards more storage/dollar. We started at 5 gigs, and made it all the way up to a whopping 80 TIMES THAT at 160GB. Now an update comes along, and there is an obvious sign of EOL for that product, and the next in line in terms of capacity offers less than half for almost double the price. The cost comes down to a bunch of new features and flash memory instead of a hard drive, which is all cool, but none of it really helps the core purpose of the original product, which was listening to music.
And I'm sorry, but there's a HUGE difference between being able to have all your music with you and having to pick and choose. I went for years without an iPod, till 2007, telling myself I had no need to carry that much music around and that one CD at a time was fine for me. Now I've had one for a few years, and now, wherever I am, if I decide I want to listen to music, I know that I can make my decision on the spot as to what I want to listen to. It's never a planning ahead kind of thing, I can browse through all my music and say "hey i haven't listened to that in a while".
I'm only 26 and I already have 31GB of music, pretty much all at 128kbps, and so I've finally reached the limit of my 30GB iPod. I've had to go through my library and decide which few albums I never listen to, but I've already been in a few situations where I want to show somebody some music, and then I realize it's left behind on my computer, because I had a moment where I thought I wouldn't want to listen to it.

I see a pretty clear analogy here... It's like Apple ditched the Mac Pro in favour of the more popular iMac, and in this thread we have a bunch of people poking fun at the silly Mac Pro users for lamenting the loss, simply because these iMac users can make do without a Mac Pro.

Its not just a situation with an update that didn't satisfy some specific wishes for a given product, its essentially an EOL for an entire type of device, I think it warrants discussion! Personally, I was hoping for a cheap, click wheel Classic with 64GB flash, or even just an updated Classic with an HDD at a lower price point and with an updated interface. I don't need or want to pay for mobile internet, touch screen, apps, and pointless low-res cameras on my music player.

miles01110
Sep 2, 2010, 08:00 AM
Then buy a Zune or an older iPod. Why do the "large library complainers" feel that they're entitled to an update when the existing models do just fine?

OllyW
Sep 2, 2010, 08:01 AM
I don't need or want to pay for mobile internet, touch screen, apps, and pointless low-res cameras on my music player.

Well said. It will be a sad day when Apple drop the iPod classic.

jeffy.dee-lux
Sep 2, 2010, 08:53 AM
Then buy a Zune or an older iPod. Why do the "large library complainers" feel that they're entitled to an update when the existing models do just fine?

OBVIOUSLY that's an option, come on, I'm not an idiot. The whole point of this thread is to point out that it's too bad that Apple will no longer be developing well designed products for this segment that integrates well with their computers and software.

br0adband
Sep 2, 2010, 09:01 AM
Two words for people:

Streaming and AirPlay

Better get used to it. ;) Local storage is becoming passe in today's wirelessly connected world. Why bother dragging around (metaphorically speaking) every piece of media you own, even in a digital format, when you can access it from pretty much anywhere? That way you never get stuck in a situation where it's "Oh crap, I forgot to put <x> on my iPod/iPhone/iPad..." and more appropriately "Oh crap, I forgot to put <x> on my iPod/iPhone/iPad... no big deal, it's on my machine at home, lemme stream it..."

Geez people, get with the new millennium will ya?

darkplanets
Sep 2, 2010, 09:25 AM
If you're using your touch for video... well yes, that's sad. Such a small screen + crappy format = sad end user here.

My video library is currently sitting around 1.5TB here, and while they're primarily mkv's with 5.1 or "HD" sound with subtitles for every language known to man, even if they were to be stripped down, put to stereo audio, and down converted to a lower resolution/different format they would still consume far more space than the iPod has to offer. Am I complaining? Nope. As far as I'm concerned its not really meant for movies, until it starts supporting mkvs or other formats.

As for the music, yeah, there are certain limitations. I have a 40GB music library of 320 mp3s that I shuffle between devices. While size is definitely a limiting factor, I'd say the lack of support for flac makes it a far worse deal than the storage size.

Of course this all really is just a moot thread, since capacity sizes are merely determined by the current flash memory pricing, and nothing else.

Tones2
Sep 2, 2010, 10:32 AM
Two words for people:

Streaming and AirPlay

Better get used to it. ;) Local storage is becoming passe in today's wirelessly connected world. Why bother dragging around (metaphorically speaking) every piece of media you own, even in a digital format, when you can access it from pretty much anywhere? That way you never get stuck in a situation where it's "Oh crap, I forgot to put <x> on my iPod/iPhone/iPad..." and more appropriately "Oh crap, I forgot to put <x> on my iPod/iPhone/iPad... no big deal, it's on my machine at home, lemme stream it..."

Geez people, get with the new millennium will ya?

Three words back:

CARRIER DATA CAPS

That currently limits how much you can stream and it'll probably get worse in the near future instead of better. If you're streaming video - forget it, You'll reach the cap in a week. Plus, the quality of streaming audio and video over 3G really sucks anyway. And if I have to realy on AT&T's 3G signal to listen to music - forget it once again. Too many drop outs, especially in transit or on a commuter train that goes underground.

No but sorry, I want storage on my device.

Tony

ucfgrad93
Sep 2, 2010, 10:37 AM
Three words back:

CARRIER DATA CAPS

That currently limits how much you can stream and it'll probably get worse in the near future instead of better. If you're streaming video - forget it, You'll reach the cap in a week. Plus, the quality of streaming audio and video over 3G really sucks anyway. And if I have to realy on AT&T's 3G signal to listen to music - forget it once again. Too many drop outs, especially in transit or on a commuter train that goes underground.

No but sorry, I want storage on my device.

Tony

Agreed. While I think cloud storage for media will make its way to us soon, I don't think it will completely eliminate local storage. In fact, I prefer local storage for the reasons you state in addition to the fact that if you travel into an area that has no coverage, you won't be able to access anything.

iCole
Sep 2, 2010, 10:39 AM
I don't care that much about capacity. I think most ppl will sync their iPods and create their own playlists on the computer and just switch between their stuff. Anyway, the classic is still around if you really need lots of space. I prefer to have more functionality, but i agree that having more space isn't a bad thing.

Tones2
Sep 2, 2010, 11:22 AM
Look, I'm always the one rolling my eyes at the people who complain about how Apple didn't come out with the product they were hoping for, but this case is a little different. For years there was a steady progression towards more storage/dollar. We started at 5 gigs, and made it all the way up to a whopping 80 TIMES THAT at 160GB. Now an update comes along, and there is an obvious sign of EOL for that product, and the next in line in terms of capacity offers less than half for almost double the price. The cost comes down to a bunch of new features and flash memory instead of a hard drive, which is all cool, but none of it really helps the core purpose of the original product, which was listening to music.
And I'm sorry, but there's a HUGE difference between being able to have all your music with you and having to pick and choose. I went for years without an iPod, till 2007, telling myself I had no need to carry that much music around and that one CD at a time was fine for me. Now I've had one for a few years, and now, wherever I am, if I decide I want to listen to music, I know that I can make my decision on the spot as to what I want to listen to. It's never a planning ahead kind of thing, I can browse through all my music and say "hey i haven't listened to that in a while".
I'm only 26 and I already have 31GB of music, pretty much all at 128kbps, and so I've finally reached the limit of my 30GB iPod. I've had to go through my library and decide which few albums I never listen to, but I've already been in a few situations where I want to show somebody some music, and then I realize it's left behind on my computer, because I had a moment where I thought I wouldn't want to listen to it.

I see a pretty clear analogy here... It's like Apple ditched the Mac Pro in favour of the more popular iMac, and in this thread we have a bunch of people poking fun at the silly Mac Pro users for lamenting the loss, simply because these iMac users can make do without a Mac Pro.

Its not just a situation with an update that didn't satisfy some specific wishes for a given product, its essentially an EOL for an entire type of device, I think it warrants discussion! Personally, I was hoping for a cheap, click wheel Classic with 64GB flash, or even just an updated Classic with an HDD at a lower price point and with an updated interface. I don't need or want to pay for mobile internet, touch screen, apps, and pointless low-res cameras on my music player.

Absolutely perfectly said. :)

Tony

Tones2
Sep 2, 2010, 11:23 AM
You're doing a great job in this thread. You clearly make the most sense.

Absolutely perfectly said. :p

Thank you.

Tony

Astro7x
Sep 2, 2010, 11:30 AM
8GB is useless for a device that does so much.

I made 16GB work for awhile, but for a heavy video user it was annoying to constantly swap out video files because I'd fill the thing up. And then I was running out of space to download Apps when I was in Wifi. Overall it was an annoyance but I wasn't going to pay $100 for what was basically a sync every week.

32GB has worked perfectly with pretty much the songs I listen to plus a ton of television shows.

Is it worth the premium of $100 just to have my entire music library on me at all times? On a device that has a high chance of getting lost, stolen or (not very likely) broken? And a device that I am probably going to swap out in 2-3 years for the latest and greatest version? I don't think so. 32GB model has been working great!

Carouser
Sep 2, 2010, 11:44 AM
Its not just a situation with an update that didn't satisfy some specific wishes for a given product, its essentially an EOL for an entire type of device, I think it warrants discussion! Personally, I was hoping for a cheap, click wheel Classic with 64GB flash, or even just an updated Classic with an HDD at a lower price point and with an updated interface. I don't need or want to pay for mobile internet, touch screen, apps, and pointless low-res cameras on my music player.

You do know that you can still buy a Classic, right? It's pretty believable that they'll keep selling the Classic until flash capacity in the iPod Touch approaches the Classic's capacity, or until there are so few people who want the Classic that it won't make sense to manufacture any more. In other words, people who want something to hold their whole library without paying for all the features you listed can still do so.

Personally, I was hoping for a cheap, click wheel Classic with 64GB flash, or even just an updated Classic with an HDD at a lower price point and with an updated interface.

So you want a cheaper Classic with less storage than the current ones? I thought the point of the thread was that Apple wasn't increasing capacity sufficiently.

Tones2
Sep 2, 2010, 11:51 AM
You do know that you can still buy a Classic, right? It's pretty believable that they'll keep selling the Classic until flash capacity in the iPod Touch approaches the Classic's capacity, or until there are so few people who want the Classic that it won't make sense to manufacture any more. In other words, people who want something to hold their whole library without paying for all the features you listed can still do so.



Well, the issue with the Classic is that it's terrible to watch video on. I'd love a 4.5" wide screen clasic - I don't even care about a touch screen. But that product will never exist. The Classic is thus a way dated device.

So what I would love is for Apple to make a HIGH CAPACITY Touch a wee bit thicker and stick 4 32GB flash chips in there which are not expensive, and charge me $500. I KNOW there's an acceptable market for that. They could then just discontinue the Classic. I'm sick of the Apple obsession with thinness, which is really the only reason why this product doesn't exist.

Tony

alphaone
Sep 2, 2010, 12:12 PM
If you're using your touch for video... well yes, that's sad. Such a small screen + crappy format = sad end user here.

How is that sad exactly?

I don't always have my MBP with me nor is it always practical to have it with me. But what do I always have with me? My iPod. I travel a lot, almost constantly. Maybe I'm sitting on an airplane and it's cramped so I don't wish to pull out my laptop and watch stuff on it at that particular point, so I pull out my iPod from my pocket and watch a tv show I compressed for it or two. Or I'm sitting on a bus for a few minutes, am I going to take out my MBP there? No. Maybe I'm just sitting at a car dealership waiting for my car's servicing to be done or killing time randomly anywhere. Those are all perfect situations for watching video on a device such as this. No, I'm probably not going to watch a full movie on a device such as this, mostly just short tv shows, but if I want to I can, and that's nice to have in a pinch.

I too have a large movie and tv show library encoded in mkv with all of the fixings, and enjoy high quality video, which is why I spent the time to do all of that encoding. But that holier than thou attitude calling watching video on a small screen such as a touch sad is well, sad.

coldpower27
Sep 2, 2010, 12:45 PM
Meh, not really feasible for 399 USD or lower pricing to have a 128GB iPod Touch, maybe next year if Flash Pricing falls...

a 128GB would likely have to be not only thicker but probably be at the 549USD price point more expensive the the entry level iPad.

look at Flash Pricing 32GB SD Cards average over $50 still, there really isn't any point for Apple to give it to you at cost...

Tones2
Sep 2, 2010, 12:56 PM
Meh, not really feasible for 399 USD or lower pricing to have a 128GB iPod Touch, maybe next year if Flash Pricing falls...

a 128GB would likely have to be not only thicker but probably be at the 549USD price point more expensive the the entry level iPad.

look at Flash Pricing 32GB SD Cards average over $50 still, there really isn't any point for Apple to give it to you at cost...

32 Gb (gigaBIT) nand flash just dropped to $4.30:

http://www.digitimes.com/print/a20100902PD206.html

That means that the cost of a 32GB module is probably at $34 or so. So make the Touch thicker and put in 2 more $34 chips and charge me an extra $100. I'm good with that. :)

Tony

coldpower27
Sep 2, 2010, 01:34 PM
32 Gb (gigaBIT) nand flash just dropped to $4.30:

http://www.digitimes.com/print/a20100902PD206.html

That means that the cost of a 32GB module is probably at $34 or so. So make the Touch thicker and put in 2 more $34 chips and charge me an extra $100. I'm good with that. :)

Tony

Too low a profit margin for Apple if that is the case... remember they to make a new seperate line for the thickness.

229USD for 8GB vs 299 USD 32GB let's see if 32GB is actually 34 USD 9-10USD for 8GB isn't unreasonable. It may Cost Apple 25USD more for the memroy but they charge 70USD more for the extra capacity.

So let's say $35 USD for 32GB So another $70 in Cost. A 100 USD boost is not enough.... Apple won't be happy with that profit margin try 150 - 200 USD... which makes it enter iPad category, so it's not a good idea as you have overlapping product lines...

128GB maybe feasible in 2011 refresh... maybe...

Tmacfan4321
Sep 2, 2010, 02:25 PM
32 Gb (gigaBIT) nand flash just dropped to $4.30:

http://www.digitimes.com/print/a20100902PD206.html

That means that the cost of a 32GB module is probably at $34 or so. So make the Touch thicker and put in 2 more $34 chips and charge me an extra $100. I'm good with that. :)

TonyFlash pricing doesn't scale quite like that. It doesn't scale linearly as you suggested.

Randman
Sep 2, 2010, 02:26 PM
Learn to be selective.

Tones2
Sep 2, 2010, 03:00 PM
Flash pricing doesn't scale quite like that. It doesn't scale linearly as you suggested.

Actually, it does.

Tony

Tones2
Sep 2, 2010, 03:06 PM
Too low a profit margin for Apple if that is the case... remember they to make a new seperate line for the thickness.

229USD for 8GB vs 299 USD 32GB let's see if 32GB is actually 34 USD 9-10USD for 8GB isn't unreasonable. It may Cost Apple 25USD more for the memroy but they charge 70USD more for the extra capacity.

So let's say $35 USD for 32GB So another $70 in Cost. A 100 USD boost is not enough.... Apple won't be happy with that profit margin try 150 - 200 USD... which makes it enter iPad category, so it's not a good idea as you have overlapping product lines...

128GB maybe feasible in 2011 refresh... maybe...

I'd happily pay $550 for a 128GB Touch. So would a lot of people. You can't compare a 16 GB iPad to a 128GB iPad - Completely different markets.

Tony

ucfgrad93
Sep 2, 2010, 03:13 PM
You can't compare a 16 GB iPad to a 128GB iPad - Completely different markets.

How are they completely different markets?:confused:

Tones2
Sep 2, 2010, 03:36 PM
How are they completely different markets?:confused:

SMALL high capacity primarily music device vs. a LARGE low capacity primarily internet device.

Tony

qwerty808
Sep 2, 2010, 03:49 PM
the reason we don't have a 128GB touch is less to do with cost than steve's obsession with size and his premeditated upgrade path.

tachnyrus
Sep 2, 2010, 03:59 PM
The sense of entitlement in this thread is pretty funny.

"Add 2x more chips in and make it thicker and charge me an extra $100?"

What is the cost of adding in more chips?
What is the cost of R&D and testing for a new PCB design? For the new case design?
What is the cost of manufacturing for a completely different touch?
What is the cost of logistics and supply for a separate touch model?
What is the cost of supporting this separate touch?
What affect will this have on the rest of the ipod line in terms of marketing and perception?
Is the market for this 128GB touch worth going through all that ****? To satisfy a few people who *need* to have their libraries on them at all times? Does a $100 premium make up for all the extra **** above?

I wouldn't mind paying extra for another USB port on my MBA either. Doesn't mean Apple's going to redesign and support a separate model just for me and a few other consumers though. You're an outlier, not the target market. Grow up and accept it.

miles01110
Sep 2, 2010, 04:02 PM
The whole point of this thread is to point out that it's too bad that Apple will no longer be developing well designed products for this segment that integrates well with their computers and software.

Too bad for you and the other 5 people that feel the need to complain about a trend that's been in motion for over 2-3 years now. What's good for the vast minority of users obviously isn't good for the bottom line.

Ace134blue
Sep 2, 2010, 04:04 PM
It used to be that the introduction of new iPods was all ABOUT capacity. Now no one seems to care. Strange. I've had an 160 GB iPod Classic for years now. I had an iPod with a 60Gb capacity I think like 5 years ago. Now, the Touch STILL is going to top out at 64GB.

I DO understand that it's impossible to go over 64GB at the current flash prices, but what I don't understand is why no one seems to CARE. :confused:

With so many people using there phones as music players these days - something that you always have with you, it's hard to understand why anyone even WANTS yet another relatively low capacity music player like the Touch to also carry around. Baffling really. The only way I'd consider a seperate music player is it it had SIGNIFICANTLY more capacity. Otherwise, I'll just use my 32GB iPhone and keep my iPod Classic.

BTW - What do you think will happen to the iPod Classic. Any updates on it?

Tony

Um, 1. Flash drives get really expensive the higher capacity it has, you said that already.

2. The ipods 5 years ago had *real* physical hard drives with a platter which is significantly less expensive. You know how much a ipod touch with 128gb of storage would cost? Atleast 600$.

3. You know why steve didnt leave that as an option? Well the price mainly, steve goes with the majority of people. The majority of people do not need that much space, and even if they did few people would spend 600+$ for an ipod let alone be able to afford it.

Ace134blue
Sep 2, 2010, 04:09 PM
32 Gb (gigaBIT) nand flash just dropped to $4.30:

http://www.digitimes.com/print/a20100902PD206.html

That means that the cost of a 32GB module is probably at $34 or so. So make the Touch thicker and put in 2 more $34 chips and charge me an extra $100. I'm good with that. :)

Tony

You know the old saying? You buy cheap you get cheap. Why would apple waste money on a dirt cheap slow nand chip? If you want to put them chips in yours, go ahead and have fun with the 3 min boot times and 10 sec app launches. Theres a reason they are so cheap. High performing ones are much more expensive than those crap nand chips.

coldpower27
Sep 2, 2010, 04:09 PM
I'd happily pay $550 for a 128GB Touch. So would a lot of people. You can't compare a 16 GB iPad to a 128GB iPod Touch - Completely different markets.

Tony

Fixed.

Maybe you would but not many people could justify throwing 550 USD on a MP3 Player...there is a reason the 500 USD 1st Gen Price Point has never reared it's head again.

I would say it's very niche market, not enough for Apple to make a whole seperate model for.

There is a reason the iPad occupies the price points it does right now, out of reach of the iPod Touches...

Carouser
Sep 2, 2010, 04:15 PM
I would say it's very niche market, not enough for Apple to make a whole seperate model for.

Didn't you hear? Someone in this very thread knows tons of people who would pay through the nose for it. The only reason it doesn't exist is because Steve Jobs wants things thin; it has nothing to do with market research, the economics of it, sourcing adequate parts, etc.

Brien
Sep 2, 2010, 04:17 PM
This seems to boil down to individual preference. Some people don't have more than a few GB of music. Others have terabytes. It's the latter group that wants more storage, and maybe next year we'll see a bump.

Panther71
Sep 2, 2010, 04:21 PM
I think we do care, it's just a matter of "nothing you can do about it". Prices dictate how these things unfold. I think the other thing is, 64GB is a very feasible amount of memory for most people. Even people with huge music collections. Personally, I have a 32GB touch, and my full music collection is around 55GB, but I manage to make it work. People can make 64GB work even more easily.

So, yeah, we care, everyone wants more storage, it's all about storage. But you have to choose when to give up the fight as to not make yourself crazy. And think that explains the lack of "why not 128GB!?" threads.

Very well put. Complaining about something is not going to magically make it happen or change to what you want. Most people have excepted the fact that 64gb is the max, and can live with that. Some people do love to complain for for the sake of complaining, sometimes.

LEStudios
Sep 2, 2010, 04:28 PM
I want the 64GB but I can afford to get the 32GB plus when I get the iPhone 4 32GB I just transfer my data. Maybe next year they have 128GB but most people may be buying the 8GB because it's the lowest price and not care about the size. You also got to look at iPhone 4 and iPad capacity. Apple don't want to erode or canibbalize sales of another line. All I can say is deal with it and be happy. ;)

Krevnik
Sep 2, 2010, 04:38 PM
Actually, it does.

Tony

The problem is that it really doesn't.

If I double the demand on a product with a fixed rate of supply, the price adjusts to the demand (or you simply don't get extra chips meaning your costs don't change).

If I make 100 64GB units, thats 200 32GB chips worth of demand. If I make 50 of 64GB and 50 of 128GB, then I'm looking at 250 32GB chips worth of demand on the same rate of supply. That affects pricing of chips of the correct read/write speed I need for my device.

Now I can tweak the supply of my devices so that I still need the same number of 32GB chips, and then it will scale linearly in terms of cost (assuming that I change the design to handle the extra space required, the extra circuit runs, etc).

That's just assuming the same chip in all cases though. As you buy different capacity chips (8GB chips are much cheaper than 32GB chips, much more than 4x depending on the application).

And the pricing of a random piece of flash doesn't mean the pricing of the flash a specific device needs is also changing in the same way. Low demand and easy supply of low-speed, low-capacity chips can drive prices down quite a bit in that area. But that's not where the demand is. The demand is for large, fast chips (SSDs and mobile devices), and that's what drives the non-linear scaling in price. Well, that and yield issues of manufacturing at the bleeding edge vs tech that has been in manufacturing for nearly a decade.

miles01110
Sep 2, 2010, 04:41 PM
Looks like this thread is of the "People who understand microeconomics vs. People who don't" garden variety.

tachnyrus
Sep 2, 2010, 04:48 PM
Looks like this thread is of the "People who understand microeconomics vs. People who don't" garden variety.

Why bother to think when you can just stick your fingers in your ears and go: "I WANT I WANT! GIMMIE! APPLE IS SO STOOOOOPID FOR IGNORING ME!"

jeffy.dee-lux
Sep 2, 2010, 05:14 PM
Looks like this thread is of the "People who understand microeconomics vs. People who don't" garden variety.

Looks like this is a thread of people who wish they weren't the only ones who valued diverse music over games and the internet. Sure the market has decided in favour of lower capacity touch-based devices, the people in this thread simply wish it hadn't, and that Apple hadn't single-mindedly go after only the most lucrative market and decided to ditch that market segment as well. Its not a question of understanding economics.

What if Apple decided to ditch Mac Pros in favour of more consumer oriented computers because that's a more popular and profitable market segment? Would you poke fun at the people who lamented this and claimed they don't "don't understand microeconomics" and should just deal?

Apple was in a market segment, and now they're leaving it. Some of us think that's too bad, so we're commiserating, is that a problem for you?

alphaone
Sep 2, 2010, 05:16 PM
Why bother to think when you can just stick your fingers in your ears and go: "I WANT I WANT! GIMMIE! APPLE IS SO STOOOOOPID FOR IGNORING ME!"

Isn't that the consumer's job? Hell isn't that what this website is partly about?

alphaone
Sep 2, 2010, 05:18 PM
Looks like this is a thread of people who wish they weren't the only ones who valued diverse music over games and the internet. Sure the market has decided in favour of lower capacity touch-based devices, the people in this thread simply wish it hadn't, and that Apple hadn't single-mindedly go after only the most lucrative market and decided to ditch that market segment as well. Its not a question of understanding economics.

What if Apple decided to ditch Mac Pros in favour of more consumer oriented computers because that's a more popular and profitable market segment? Would you poke fun at the people who lamented this and claimed they don't "don't understand microeconomics" and should just deal?

Apple was in a market segment, and now they're leaving it. Some of us think that's too bad, so we're commiserating, is that a problem for you?

+1. I was thinking about responding as well because the comment you quoted disappointed me.

tachnyrus
Sep 2, 2010, 05:24 PM
Isn't that the consumer's job? Hell isn't that what this website is partly about?

Definitely! However, I think most of us can understand why Apple did things a certain way instead of whining that their sense of entitlement wasn't fulfilled and propose pie-in-the-sky ways that Apple "should" have done things.

Sure, I'm not happy about the massive downgrade the Nano got, I'm not happy about the relatively high price of the iPads, and I'm not happy about how port-crippled the MBA is. But I'm not whining that Apple *should* have done things different to suit my own (and in the minority) needs.

Dagless
Sep 2, 2010, 05:24 PM
I care :(. This update was almost perfect for me but I just can't make the jump if it's only 64gb. I'm sure the next update will bring in 128gb iPods and maybe some more nifty features.
I don't like to fuss around managing my music collection on my iPods, I like it all with me wherever I go so I guess I'll be stuck using my 5.5G iPod for another year.

Carouser
Sep 2, 2010, 05:30 PM
Sure the market has decided in favour of lower capacity touch-based devices, the people in this thread simply wish it hadn't, and that Apple hadn't single-mindedly go after only the most lucrative market and decided to ditch that market segment as well.

They didn't ditch any market segment, since they still sell the Classic. Did you know that? You can still buy one. It's already been said in the thread.

Just because people want to buy updated iPod Classics doesn't mean Apple can update them and still sell them at a profit. Do you think Apple should take a loss to satisfy some consumers?

jeffy.dee-lux
Sep 3, 2010, 10:30 AM
They didn't ditch any market segment, since they still sell the Classic. Did you know that? You can still buy one. It's already been said in the thread.

Just because people want to buy updated iPod Classics doesn't mean Apple can update them and still sell them at a profit. Do you think Apple should take a loss to satisfy some consumers?

I agree that new products need to be profitable and that improvements can't just come out of nowhere.

What you're suggesting is that Apple will continue to develop a large capacity music player, and they're just waiting for cheaper/better technology to make it worth while. If that is the case, then I am happy and just need to be a little patient.

Tones2
Sep 3, 2010, 12:19 PM
Understand that this forum is WAY WAY skewed by opinions of 21 and under fanboys. :) I keep forgeting I'm probably arguing with 15 year olds here.

There is definitely a market for high capacity device. This had been Apple's approach to continually increase capacity for the LIFE of the iPod models prior to the Touch. If there wasn't a market, they would discontinue the Classic, plain and simple, because you know Steve Jobs really wants to.

It's also understandable that Apple can't yet put in 64GB nand flash chips in their devices as it's currently too expensive. Of course I understand this.

What I don't understand is why, with no real decrease in nand flash prices in sight a year ago, Apple didn't come up with a redesign of the Classic in some way to make it more modern. Even simply a widescreen, or put a hard drive Touch (if archos can do a hard drive in a touch screen without sacrificing battery life, why can't apple). Or use four chips in a Touch instead of two and make it thicker. I think some solution is possible without a MAJOR redesign.

But the conjecture here is that Apple does not do this because there is no market for a high capacity device. I say bull to that. There is - even if you consider just the whole "Classic" market for one. But even if research DID shows that there is (and NO ONE here knows whether that is true or not despite all the people who THINK they do), it comes down to one person making that call to do it or not. And Steve Jobs is obsessed with thinner and thinner products. And that's why it doesn't happen. He knows he has fanboys who will buy his product and assume everything Apple does is the best thing for their customers, so he doesn't care so much about market research. When the heck has he EVER listened to customer wishes?

OK - now here we go. Let me have it fanboys!

Tony

racketeer71
Sep 3, 2010, 12:42 PM
What everybody in this thread seems to miss, is the fact that 640kB ought to be enough for everyone.

Carouser
Sep 3, 2010, 12:49 PM
There is definitely a market for high capacity device. This had been Apple's approach to continually increase capacity for the LIFE of the iPod models prior to the Touch. If there wasn't a market, they would discontinue the Classic, plain and simple, because you know Steve Jobs really wants to.

Yes, there's a market for such a device, and Apple sells one. If there wasn't a market, yes they would discontinue it, because only an idiot would offer a product for which there is no market. You don't need to impute all these vague and bizarre motives to Jobs to explain what Apple is doing.

What I don't understand is why, with no real decrease in nand flash prices in sight a year ago, Apple didn't come up with a redesign of the Classic in some way to make it more modern. Even simply a widescreen, or put a hard drive Touch (if archos can do a hard drive in a touch screen without sacrificing battery life, why can't apple). Or use four chips in a Touch instead of two and make it thicker. I think some solution is possible without a MAJOR redesign.

Why didn't they do any of this? Maybe because the cost of doing so would have rendered the Classic unprofitable, or any number of other reasonable things said plenty of times throughout the thread. How many more times should we give them to you? Just because you think it is possible and that sufficient people would buy it doesn't make it so.

But the conjecture here is that Apple does not do this because there is no market for a high capacity device. I say bull to that. There is - even if you consider just the whole "Classic" market for one. But even if research DID shows that there is (and NO ONE here knows whether that is true or not despite all the people who THINK they do), it comes down to one person making that call to do it or not. And Steve Jobs is obsessed with thinner and thinner products. And that's why it doesn't happen.

So NO ONE knows if there is a market for this, even though you've consistently said that there definitely is.

Nobody in the thread said there is no market for a high capacity device. There is such a market, which is why Apple still sells the Classic. And yet you think the reason why you didn't get what you want is because Jobs is obsessed with thinness. All the explanations why Apple might not just throw X, Y, and Z in there, (all of which are minor - how do we know? because you said so) can be dismissed because people are fanboys. lmao

Orange™
Sep 3, 2010, 12:53 PM
Since most of the users on here are nothing but dirty thieves, they don't really deserve the chance to have more storage. Seriously, only scum pirate music and on the first page alone multiple users are saying that their music is over 50 GB. Yeah right, like an 18 year old really paid for that, pathetic. I really really doubt that any of them purchased their collection but rather used torrents. :mad:

Thieves like them are ruining the music industry!

ReallyBigFeet
Sep 3, 2010, 12:56 PM
Since most of the users on here are nothing but dirty thieves, they don't really deserve the chance to have more storage. Seriously, only scum pirate music and on the first page alone multiple users are saying that their music is over 50 GB. Yeah right, like an 18 year old really paid for that, pathetic. I really really doubt that any of them purchased their collection but rather used torrents. :mad:

Thieves like them are ruining the music industry!

Orange, didn't you just get out of Time Out? Going for the Double Down I see?

joe1946
Sep 3, 2010, 01:09 PM
How many here would pay $599 for a 128GB iPod Touch ? Not many I bet and Apple knows that. I paid $188.26 for 12GB of 1600Mhz DDR3 RAM for my Core i7 PC back in Jan 2009 and today that same RAM cost much more. Ever since SSD drives started selling well RAM prices started to go up.
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a21/jogiba/computer%20sales/Copyofewizordercrop.jpg

Beric
Sep 3, 2010, 01:19 PM
How many here would pay $599 for a 128GB iPod Touch ? Not many I bet and Apple knows that. I paid $188.26 for 12GB of 1600Mhz DDR3 RAM for my Core i7 PC back in Jan 2009 and today that same RAM cost much more. Ever since SSD drives started selling well RAM prices started to go up.
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a21/jogiba/computer%20sales/Copyofewizordercrop.jpg

Yup. I got my 6GB for $80 last July. Now, it's hard to find 4GB for that much. Prices are going up, not down, due to demand.

Orange™
Sep 3, 2010, 01:26 PM
Orange, didn't you just get out of Time Out? Going for the Double Down I see?

I was given a 24 hour ban for calling some fool a 'dunderhead'.
I was called a troll, nothing happened to them, I was insulted, nothing happened to them. The admins on this site are a joke.

Anyway, are you saying that they didn't pirate their music? Are you one of the users I was referring too? Maybe once you've worked for an honest days pay, you'll see the scum for what they are.

ReallyBigFeet
Sep 3, 2010, 01:53 PM
Nope, I payed for all my music but as someone has pointed out prior in the thread, I'm older (mid 40's) so had literally decades of CD's that I've since ripped into my iTunes collection. And I've long since converted my entire DVD library to ripped ISO's as well.

But there are people who would still use the larger capacity for non-media purposes....there are plenty of apps that let you use the memory as a form of Flash storage for other document types.

Carlanga
Sep 3, 2010, 02:31 PM
I care, but there is nothing you can do about it! for example: would you buy a bigger capacity iPod touch for $1,000 just for the extra HD space, I don't think so....

SingBlueSilver
Sep 3, 2010, 02:37 PM
Understand that this forum is WAY WAY skewed by opinions of 21 and under fanboys. :) I keep forgeting I'm probably arguing with 15 year olds here.

There is definitely a market for high capacity device. This had been Apple's approach to continually increase capacity for the LIFE of the iPod models prior to the Touch. If there wasn't a market, they would discontinue the Classic, plain and simple, because you know Steve Jobs really wants to.

It's also understandable that Apple can't yet put in 64GB nand flash chips in their devices as it's currently too expensive. Of course I understand this.

What I don't understand is why, with no real decrease in nand flash prices in sight a year ago, Apple didn't come up with a redesign of the Classic in some way to make it more modern. Even simply a widescreen, or put a hard drive Touch (if archos can do a hard drive in a touch screen without sacrificing battery life, why can't apple). Or use four chips in a Touch instead of two and make it thicker. I think some solution is possible without a MAJOR redesign.

But the conjecture here is that Apple does not do this because there is no market for a high capacity device. I say bull to that. There is - even if you consider just the whole "Classic" market for one. But even if research DID shows that there is (and NO ONE here knows whether that is true or not despite all the people who THINK they do), it comes down to one person making that call to do it or not. And Steve Jobs is obsessed with thinner and thinner products. And that's why it doesn't happen. He knows he has fanboys who will buy his product and assume everything Apple does is the best thing for their customers, so he doesn't care so much about market research. When the heck has he EVER listened to customer wishes?

OK - now here we go. Let me have it fanboys!

Tony

I like how you act like you're so old and mature when, from what I gather, you are acting the most childish out of all the posts I've read in this thread.

As soon as someone differs in opinion with a valid argument you call them young. I hate agism on that level. Since you seem to care so much about peoples' ages, how old are you?

How does age determine how much music one has?

I'm not saying it's 128 GB unnecessary, but I think it's reasonable to assume someone can manage with "only" 64 GB of media to carry around IN YOUR POCKET. If you're so old, you should be amazed by this, remember when there were cassette tapes?

As someone mentioned earlier, I hate people's sense of entitlement, like Apple owes them this or that.

Tones2
Sep 3, 2010, 04:23 PM
:)

tooobe
Sep 3, 2010, 04:52 PM
This is a really tired old argument.:rolleyes: Some of us don't want to have to PRE-DECIDE what we want to listen to each day. I have NO IDEA usually. So when I'm out and think of something I want to listen to, I want it on my device. I would like that device to be my 128GB iPhone :), but I'll settle for a 2nd device if I had to. but 64GB doesn't do anything for me. So I'll carry my Classic, thank you. The only reason I would care about the Touch if it matched by Classic in capacity or at least came close, then I could replace it with something I can actually watch movies on comfortably.

Tony

If you don't care about carrying a 2nd device, you shouldn't care about carrying a 3rd device. Buy two iPod touches, carry them both around and stop complaining ;) they'll still probably be thinner than a iPod classic :) JK

Tikker
Sep 3, 2010, 05:15 PM
I'm not sure if more than 25 or 30 GB of decent music even exists

gta50419
Sep 3, 2010, 05:22 PM
You must be young. Us older people have a LOT more music / videos. My library is like 250GB+, about which 120GB is music and the rest video. Most people I know have similar libraries. It's definitely NOT about having the top model - it's about what best my library will fit into.

Tony
holy crap man, 120gb of music?
lol wow! that's like 100,000 songs right??

puts my 4.18 gb (993 songs) to shame haha

Chundles
Sep 3, 2010, 05:27 PM
holy crap man, 120gb of music?
lol wow! that's like 100,000 songs right??

I have a 1TB+ iTunes library skewed about 70/30 movies/music.

Do I want an iPod I can put all of that on? Hell no. I want enough space to put my favourite albums, podcasts and the odd movie. 32GB is enough in my pocket.

sushi
Sep 3, 2010, 05:37 PM
No argument that a larger capacity iPod touch would be nice.

This is business for Apple. I would suspect that the market for a larger capacity iPod touch is small. And with the current increase in memory cost Apple would need to charge a premium -- a premium that most would not pay. From Apple's perspective, it's better to provide new features this time then worry about increased capacity in the future.

Personally, if I were in the market for an iPod touch, I would rather have the new features than more memory. But that's just me. And yes, I have a large library.

Tmacfan4321
Sep 4, 2010, 12:04 AM
Actually, it does.

Tony
Since when? I've never seen anything that suggests this anywhere. It would be nice to see some sort of evidence to back up this claim.


Looks like this thread is of the "People who understand microeconomics vs. People who don't" garden variety.
Personally, I did better in Macro last year. :D


I have a 1TB+ iTunes library skewed about 70/30 movies/music.

Do I want an iPod I can put all of that on? Hell no. I want enough space to put my favourite albums, podcasts and the odd movie. 32GB is enough in my pocket.
Same here, but I have only 100GB of media with a 70/30 split in favor of music.

I can deal with 32GB only in a device.

GekiRed
Sep 4, 2010, 12:30 PM
Understand that this forum is WAY WAY skewed by opinions of 21 and under fanboys. :) I keep forgeting I'm probably arguing with 15 year olds here.

There is definitely a market for high capacity device. This had been Apple's approach to continually increase capacity for the LIFE of the iPod models prior to the Touch. If there wasn't a market, they would discontinue the Classic, plain and simple, because you know Steve Jobs really wants to.

It's also understandable that Apple can't yet put in 64GB nand flash chips in their devices as it's currently too expensive. Of course I understand this.

What I don't understand is why, with no real decrease in nand flash prices in sight a year ago, Apple didn't come up with a redesign of the Classic in some way to make it more modern. Even simply a widescreen, or put a hard drive Touch (if archos can do a hard drive in a touch screen without sacrificing battery life, why can't apple). Or use four chips in a Touch instead of two and make it thicker. I think some solution is possible without a MAJOR redesign.

But the conjecture here is that Apple does not do this because there is no market for a high capacity device. I say bull to that. There is - even if you consider just the whole "Classic" market for one. But even if research DID shows that there is (and NO ONE here knows whether that is true or not despite all the people who THINK they do), it comes down to one person making that call to do it or not. And Steve Jobs is obsessed with thinner and thinner products. And that's why it doesn't happen. He knows he has fanboys who will buy his product and assume everything Apple does is the best thing for their customers, so he doesn't care so much about market research. When the heck has he EVER listened to customer wishes?

OK - now here we go. Let me have it fanboys!

Tony

I agree with a lot of what you have to say there, Tony.

I'm definitely not a Apple/Mac fanboy (in fact, personally I hate people who think that Steve Jobs is the Second Coming and that they'll buy any old crap just because he tells them to... As for Fuhrer Jobs, I personally think he's a arrogant douchebag whose jeans are a bit too tight for him!)

In any case, he'll never listen to the public where customer wishes are concerned as he thinks he knows what's best, when in fact he's just a sad, pitiful little man who's so arrogant, he thinks he's better than anyone else when in fact he isn't.

One of these days, he'll end up pissing off the wrong people and he'll end up being kicked out of Apple and hopefully they'll bring in a new CEO who'll be willing to listen to the people who buy their products as well as potential customers.

Myself, I wouldn't have even thought about buying a Apple product until recently with the iPod Touch/iPad and even then, I'm only buying them (the iPad next year when the 2nd Gen version comes out) for the Apps as I'm going to university this year and there's a lot of Apps which will come in handy for my Foundation Cerificate in Computing course.

As for a MacBook Pro, I'm hoping to get one bought for me as a Disabled student using the Disabled Student Allowance as there's no way I could afford to buy one on my own (and even then, I'm a PC guy myself first and last!)

Where music is concerned, I'm not ashamed to say that I pirated a lot of my collection (especially where Japanese/Korean Pop and Rock is concerned) and if anyone here has a problem with that, I don't care what you have to say!

sracer
Sep 4, 2010, 01:05 PM
You must be young. Us older people have a LOT more music / videos. My library is like 250GB+, about which 120GB is music and the rest video. Most people I know have similar libraries. It's definitely NOT about having the top model - it's about what best my library will fit into.

Tony
I'm one of those older guys. My media library weighs in a little over 2TB. The music portion of that dwarfs the largest capacity portable media player so I've gotten past the "I need to have my entire collection with me at all times" mentality.

I use smart playlists, genius playlists, and genius mixes to get a reasonable sampling of my collection on a device. Whether it is 16GB, 32GB, or 64GB, this approach scales well.

sracer
Sep 4, 2010, 01:10 PM
Understand that this forum is WAY WAY skewed by opinions of 21 and under fanboys. :) I keep forgeting I'm probably arguing with 15 year olds here.
True. I forget about that myself.

There is definitely a market for high capacity device. This had been Apple's approach to continually increase capacity for the LIFE of the iPod models prior to the Touch. If there wasn't a market, they would discontinue the Classic, plain and simple, because you know Steve Jobs really wants to.
To me the bigger issue is not capacity but UI. There is no portable player on the market that has a good interface for dealing with 10,000's tracks. Smart playlists, genius playlists, and genius mixes are good starts (and fine for the current capacity of players), but there needs to be something more.

For example, tracks need to be able to be cataloged by more than just genre. The ability to "tag" tracks with multiple keywords and then access tracks based on those tags would be helpful. There is a lot more that needs to be done with the interface before capacity is expanded.

Skaffenuk
Sep 4, 2010, 02:08 PM
Understand that this forum is WAY WAY skewed by opinions of 21 and under fanboys. :) I keep forgeting I'm probably arguing with 15 year olds here.

You really need to stop banging on about people being young - as if that in some way invalidates their opinions, it's getting a bit tiresome now.

I'd need a 500gb+ device to hold my entire library but I personally can't see the attraction in a huge capacity mobile device. I only want to be able to carry enough entertainment to see me through a flight/commute/holiday - and I don't need more than 30-40gb for that, max.

AceFernalld
Sep 4, 2010, 02:15 PM
You really need to stop banging on about people being young - as if that in some way invalidates their opinions, it's getting a bit tiresome now.

Thank you. I'm 15, and I'm going to buy a 64GB iPod touch next Friday. I have 4 seasons of TV shows, 6 movies, 7GBs of music, a few thousand photos, a few podcast episodes and over 100 apps. This comes to a little over 100GBs, which my 64GB iPad, unfortunately, can't hold. I was really hoping for a 128GB touch this year, even if it was priced at $499, but I knew that probably wouldn't come until sometime early next year, when the iPhone is upgraded to 64GB, and the iPad and iPod touch are upgraded to 128GB. Nonetheless, I'm not waiting. I need that HD video recording & Retina display NOW! :D

Salacion
Sep 4, 2010, 02:35 PM
It used to be that the introduction of new iPods was all ABOUT capacity. Now no one seems to care. Strange. I've had an 160 GB iPod Classic for years now. I had an iPod with a 60Gb capacity I think like 5 years ago. Now, the Touch STILL is going to top out at 64GB.

I DO understand that it's impossible to go over 64GB at the current flash prices, but what I don't understand is why no one seems to CARE. :confused:

With so many people using there phones as music players these days - something that you always have with you, it's hard to understand why anyone even WANTS yet another relatively low capacity music player like the Touch to also carry around. Baffling really. The only way I'd consider a seperate music player is it it had SIGNIFICANTLY more capacity. Otherwise, I'll just use my 32GB iPhone and keep my iPod Classic.

BTW - What do you think will happen to the iPod Classic. Any updates on it?

Tony

No actually, it's not impossible to go over 64GB. Toshiba released 64GB NAND flash drives last year, so it very well is possible for the Touch to have 128GB. The only factor is pricing, where Apple would more than likely charge a premium price. They even released a 128GB NAND this year, so we will definitely see a 128GB iPhone. It just takes time and a price decrease.

As for the iPod Classic, it's obvious what's going to happen. Apple is milking it. Because Apple still has the Classic in stock, they'll wait to sell out and discontinue the line (if they already haven't). In about 8-10 months when it finally sells out, Apple will release its 128GB iPod Touch. Simple as that.

joe1946
Sep 4, 2010, 03:18 PM
Thank you. I'm 15, and I'm going to buy a 64GB iPod touch next Friday. I have 4 seasons of TV shows, 6 movies, 7GBs of music, a few thousand photos, a few podcast episodes and over 100 apps. This comes to a little over 100GBs, which my 64GB iPad, unfortunately, can't hold. I was really hoping for a 128GB touch this year, even if it was priced at $499, but I knew that probably wouldn't come until sometime early next year, when the iPhone is upgraded to 64GB, and the iPad and iPod touch are upgraded to 128GB. Nonetheless, I'm not waiting. I need that HD video recording & Retina display NOW! :D

If a 128GB Touch was available it would be priced at $599 and not $499 since going from 32GB to 64GB Touch cost $100.