Apple Updates Entire iPod Family, Bringing Capacity and Performance Bumps to iPod Touch and Video Camera to iPod Nano

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/09/apple-updates-entire-ipod-family-bringing-capacity-and-performance-bumps-to-ipod-touch-and-video-camera-to-ipod-nano/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article/2009/09/09/145013-ipod_family.jpg

Apple announced new pricing and capacities for its iPod line of digital media players at today's "It's Only Rock and Roll" (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/09/live-coverage-of-its-only-rock-and-roll-media-event/) media event. Most notably, the new generation of the iPod nano line receives numerous upgrades (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/09/09nano.html), including a video camera and FM radio with live pausing and iTunes tagging capability.

The iPod touch gets a hardware upgrade (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/09/09touch.html) for the high-capacity models and a price cut on the lowest-capacity model. The 8 GB iPod touch will be $199 (down from $249), while the 32 GB and 64 GB models will be $299 and $399, respectively.

The 32 GB and 64 GB iPod touch models are "50% faster" than previous models and will run OpenGL ES 2.0. iPod touch owners who already have the latest 3.0 firmware will also be able to download the new iPhone OS 3.1 firmware, which is available today, at no charge, while those running older firmware versions can upgrade for $4.95.

The only change to the iPod classic model is a capacity bump to 160GB, up from 120GB, at the same price point of $249.

The iPod shuffle also receives a refresh today (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/09/09shuffle.html), including new pink, green and blue colors in addition to the original black and silver. A new polished stainless steel special edition model available only through Apple online and retail stores also joins the mix. The new iPod shuffle will be available in two capacities - 2 GB and 4 GB. The 2 GB model will be priced at $59 and the 4 GB model will be $79, while the stainless steel special edition will be priced at $99. Also, Apple is working with third-party headphone manufacturers to release new headphones that will be compatible with the iPod shuffle's feature set.

The iPod nano receives the most noticeable feature changes (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/09/09nano.html) with the addition of a video camera, an FM radio, Voice Over, and the new Genius Mix feature. The iPod nano will also have a slightly larger screen at 2.2 inches within the same form factor as the previous model and with a polished anodized aluminum casing. To support video recording, a microphone and speaker are also added, as well a built-in pedometer. Available today at $149 for the 8 GB version and $179 for the 16 GB version, the iPod nano will also be available in nine different colors.

All updated iPod models are available today.

Article Link: Apple Updates Entire iPod Family, Bringing Capacity and Performance Bumps to iPod Touch and Video Camera to iPod Nano (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/09/apple-updates-entire-ipod-family-bringing-capacity-and-performance-bumps-to-ipod-touch-and-video-camera-to-ipod-nano/)

[thegoldenmackid]

And iPod Touch users are still pissed.

[macshill]

If only Microsoft had the foresight to add a camera to a Zune HD. Then it'd be an iPod Touch killer!

http://i28.tinypic.com/2w3751y.jpg

[alm99]

And iPod Touch users are still pissed.

Yep, I am.

[LAS.mac]

No video camera in the Touch? What they are thinking?
Nah, maybe it's because of those production problems reported few days ago?
:eek:

[Bubba Satori]

http://www.kronika.visoko.si/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/serious_cat.jpg

[Jamessinwest]

pretty sure the 8GB touch was $229, not $249 making it a $30 drop

[Barbie]

apple is going to the dogs

it needs some water

ideas are running dry

[thegoldenmackid]

apple is going to the dogs

it needs some water

ideas are running dry

Umm...seriously what (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=782793) were you expecting (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=782746). It's an iPod event.

[RazHyena]

Gee....Macrumors finally catches up. :rolleyes:


I'm surprised the Touch doesn't get the video! Still, an awesome update.

[*LTD*]

Witness the era of the iPhone. All devices converging into one.

iPods are gradually being eclipsed.

[TheBritishBloke]

Gotta admit, I am dissapointed in this, I've just ordered my new iPod nano, but I was going to get one anyway. But they surely couldve done better.

I think they've run out of ideas for the iPod line. Until they make them all touchscreen or holographic lol

[megatronbomb]

The firmware being downloaded/installed on my first gen Touch is 3.1.1 - What's the difference I wonder?

[Stiss]

Yeah i'm pretty disappointed, even though them shuffles are very cute.

If Apple are not carful there going to run into people calling them all sorts along the line of 'lacking innovation of late'.

To some people SL has been a stop gap, no real noticeable changes because they are all under the hood and now these iPods which lets face it, are nothing special.

A camera, thats inventive, who didn't see that one coming.

[Scottsdale]

pretty sure the 8GB touch was $229, not $249 making it a $30 drop

You are correct. I thought was weird when site I was on mentioned Schiller say or double capacity to 32 GB for $100 more. Was really quadruple 8-32 right?

[BongoBanger]

The iPod Nano is a nice device. The rest of the announcement was a bit pointless.

[nfl46]

HAHA! Poor iPod Touch users...wanted a camera and video...Good job, Apple! Some ppl will leave the iPhone if the new Touch had the same video/camera...plus its the same speed as the 3GS...I actually knew a few ppl who wanted to get rid of their 3GS and get a BB and buy a Touch on the side, if it had all the same features as a 3GS minus the phone feature.

[*LTD*]

apple is going to the dogs

it needs some water

ideas are running dry

Um . . . Apple has had nothing but ideas for the last decade. Apple is really the only one that has had any ideas worth anything lately. And then everyone else lines up to copy.

iPods are slowly being eclipsed by iPhones. The phoneless mp3/mediaplayer is dying. We all need to accept that.

[flyguy206]

Apple made a big mistake. They should have not put a camera in the nano. If they was not going to put one in the touch.

[SandynJosh]

If only Microsoft had the foresight to add a camera to a Zune HD. Then it'd be an iPod Touch killer!

Yeah, sure. Putting anything on a Zune is like adding a string a pearls on a pig.

[Sinsinnati]

Apple could have had $300 from me today if the new iPod Touch had a built in camera with video. The iPod Touch update is lame.

[BongoBanger]

Um . . . Apple has had nothing but ideas for the last decade. Apple is really the only one that has had any ideas worth anything lately. And then everyone else lines up to copy.

Really? How so? I don't dispute Apple's innovation but they're far from the only ones.

Yeah, sure. Putting anything on a Zune is like adding a string a pearls on a pig.

Awesome! How did you find the new Zune HD? I'm assuming you've used it based on your comments.

[mpb2000]

So, I currently have a 4 year old 60 GB 5G ipod. I have been waiting to upgrade to a touch with the same capacity. I was also looking forward to the camera we all thought the touch was getting. Not that it was going to be a huge deal, but I would have liked a 3.2 MP camera with an easy to use interface with iTunes/iPhoto (my cell phone sure doesn't have that). So, my dilema is this: Do I hold onto my current ipod, or buy the 64 GB w/o the camera now? The touch has been out for a while...when are we going to see a major product change, like we did from the 5G ipod to the 1G touch? It looks like the nano only got a video camera, which I'm not particuarly interested in, so are we ever going to see a still camera on the touch? Thoughts?

[Prof.]

September 9, 2009: Apple has officially run out of ideas for their iPods.

RIP

[JoshJosh117]

I'm surprised the iPod Touch didn't get a camera to begin with. And now the nano gets one? Who needs to take pictures/video with a nano? And where is 16 gb?

[RazHyena]

Apple could have had $300 from me today if the new iPod Touch had a built in camera with video. The iPod Touch update is lame.

I'm confused. Why didn't the Touch get a camera? I mean the Nano update is pretty slick but why would the Touch be left out? :confused:

[Stiss]

Apple could have had $300 from me today if the new iPod Touch had a built in camera with video. The iPod Touch update is lame.

Yeah i agree, with 20 million touches sold world wide, only topped by the 30 million iPhones you think they would of give one of there top 3 products a major upgrade to really stay ahead of the competition. No Oled screen either =[.

[Eric S.]

Yawn.

I'm happy that the Classic still lives and at higher capacity, though. And that the touch didn't get a camera - what a yucky idea that was.

[*LTD*]

Yeah i agree, with 20 million touches sold world wide, only topped by the 30 million iPhones you think they would of give one of there top 3 products a major upgrade to really stay ahead of the competition. No Oled screen either =[.

What competition?

[PeterQVenkman]

It's down to a Zune HD or iPod Nano now for me. I can't justify the price of that iPod touch for so little added.

The app store is nice, but I don't need another gaming device.

[AtHomeBoy_2000]

So, the "new" 32G and 64G iPod Touches feature "Earphones with Remote and Mic".

Could that mean the high end touches could run the Skype app???

[JasO]

Glad I returned my 16GB Nano not one month ago. I would imagine folks who purchased last gen Nanos' over the last few weeks would feel a little 'hard done by'.

[Iori]

There is a stainless steel nano being sold exclusively on the online apple store.

[voltare]

Wow. I guess I would much rather have a 32GB nano than a video camera...

[Analog Kid]

Looks like I'm $400 richer for a while. Next update when I can get GPS and 64GB, and the Touch didn't cross the bar. Figure I'll buy in again next year when either the iPhone grows, or the Touch adds GPS.

[Eric S.]

iPods are slowly being eclipsed by iPhones. The phoneless mp3/mediaplayer is dying. We all need to accept that.

No, we don't. I don't carry a phone around with me. I have a cell phone that often gets lost for a couple weeks before I find it again.

[RazHyena]

So, the "new" 32G and 64G iPod Touches feature "Earphones with Remote and Mic".

Could that mean the high end touches could run the Skype app???

Yup. My brother runs skype on his 2Gen Touch with a microphone/speaker unit.

[goobot]

i knew there was no camera for the touch so haha to you guys trashing the phone

[elhungarian]

Can't believe touch didn't get camera..
Also what happened to the 16gb ipod touch? Is it getting camera before christmas?

[Analog Kid]

So, the "new" 32G and 64G iPod Touches feature "Earphones with Remote and Mic".

Could that mean the high end touches could run the Skype app???
Current (now known as last gen) Touches run Skype.

[mandoman]

nano = nice update!

classic = yippee, it lives on! Of course they had a 160gb version two years ago, so nothing new here...

touch = meh. At least it is higher capacity and faster. Cool if you are a gamer. I think no camera (yet) because they don't want to cannibalize iphone sales.

shuffle = gosh I hate that thing. Put the controls back on the unit please! I don't care how many crappy third party headphones with controls come out for it.

itunes = more bloat to make it even slower! Can we please get a de-featured no store, music only itunes lite please?

[Cordless_Drill]

Am I the only one who still loves a Classic?

Love em, love em, love em. I have a Classic for "normal" use, a 1G nano for the gym and a 3G iPhone for ... a phone. I'm thrilled with that lineup.

I like Apple.

ps: I won't be buying anything introduced today. No need.

[RazHyena]

Um . . . Apple has had nothing but ideas for the last decade. Apple is really the only one that has had any ideas worth anything lately. And then everyone else lines up to copy.

iPods are slowly being eclipsed by iPhones. The phoneless mp3/mediaplayer is dying. We all need to accept that.

Oh please, not everyone likes their phone and mp3 player all in one.

[chas0001]

I think that the iPod Touch was definitely due a camera. They must have withdrawn it at the last moment. Its makes no sense otherwise.

[Krafty]

Damn.. I have an 8GB iPhone 2G but thats iPod Nano is tempting...

[ipodtouch-user]

This is a HUGE disappointment for us ipod touch 2G users. How lame is it to offer video camera and built-in mic for the nano, and nothing for the touch. The storage upgrades (to 64GB) are practically worthless -- who is going to shell out the dough just for memory increase, especially if you aren't even able to shoot video (a reason extra storage might even be useful).

Oh, but we get a firmware upgrade --- BFD.

Seriously, ipod touch users are getting the shaft yet again (a microphone should have been built into the first one to begin with, and there isn't even voice command support if you plug a mic in).

The "no camera/mic" news is a complete deal-breaker on this one, and very aggravating to boot.

Truly lame Apple. :(

[Mexbearpig]

Wow Apple, really? I was stoked for the camera. And then the NANO gets a camera and the touch doesnt. Come on.
Now im just waiting for the 2G vs 3G speed test to see if I should get a refurb :mad:

[mozmac]

Apple could have had $300 from me today if the new iPod Touch had a built in camera with video. The iPod Touch update is lame.

My feelings exactly.

[apparatchik]

Im really disappointed to see the nano gets an FM Tunner, a Pedometer and a Videocamera with mic, and the Touch gets nothing but an unsurprising capacity bump, Im still buying an iTouch, but the FM Tunner and camara would made this a truly significant upgrade... Im looking to replace my 2 years old cybershot and my recently dead 5Gen iPod and a single devide for both would been awesome....

[JoshJosh117]

Oh please, not everyone likes their phone and mp3 player all in one.

Plus, not many people want to pay $30 a month.

[pimentoLoaf]

Bought a Blue Nanopod just for all my endless BBC podcasts I seem to be subscribing to. I can finally free up my ol' Touch for iTunes U video lectures and such.

Music? Oh yeah. That's what my Product Red Nano is for ... :cool:

[Stiss]

What competition?

Its that kind of attitude which has led to the range getting pretty stagnant.

[Micjose]

so you can only take video and not still pictures on the nano?! :confused:

[bloodycape]

Nice to see FM radio is finally added, but a camera is kind of pointless in my opinion. Now if it was on the Touch that is another story.

[zedsdead]

That rumor about the iPod Touch having production issues was true...shocked that it delayed the camera getting added altogether.

[.Andy]

They're really treading water and just doing incremental upgrades with the touch.

[Flighty]

I'm pleased there's no camera, I can't see the point of it personally. A bit frustrated at the cost, does the new 64GB cost more than the second gen 32??

Thinking back to the release of the first gens, the 8 and 16 came out together in September, however the 32 came out a month later. Wondering if they're going to do something like this again this year?

So yes, I'm getting a 64GB, unless of course they surprise us suddenly with a 128 version. But I'm gonna wait a little while longer. I use my iPod for music performance videos combined with subtitles as I am deaf and 'hear' through an artificial cochlear implant. As such I don't want an iPhone either. Just a bloody good music player, which is what the iPod Touch really is.

[Morgenland]

Apple could have had $300 from me today if the new iPod Touch had a built in camera with video. The iPod Touch update is lame.

From me too. Even more....again they forgot to include GPS. Pictures without GPS loc data do not go seamless with iPhoto. iPhoto´s geotagging remains to be exclusivly for the rest of our non-Apple-products. I really can not understand this point.

[winterspan]

I don't care about everything else... it was just an iPod show after all. BUT, I can't believe they kept the old hardware in the 16GB iPod Touch! You now have to spend $300 for the 32GB to get the Cortex-A8/PowerVR SGX.

They are purposefully playing down that fact to be able to sell last years hardware at today's prices. At least I understand the difference. Do you know how many people are going to pick up the 16GB Touch without realizing it doesn't have the same capabilities as the 32GB/64GB? All of these new games will be coming out and they will run really crappy on the 16GB because of the weak processor and graphics chip. Not to mention future OpenGL2 games won't run at all.

[*LTD*]

Face it, folks.

It's aaaaall about the iPhone. We're already heading toward total device convergence, and Apple just made a clear statement to that effect.

[redfirebird08]

So it took around 1 year and 7 months (February 2008 to September 2009) for the high end Touch to double in capacity from 32 gigs to 64 gigs. I am hoping that a 128 gig model will be available sometime in the next year and a half or so. I've been patiently waiting for it and will continue waiting patiently. It's pointless to have a nice widescreen handheld video player with a pretty limited amount of storage.

[tabasco70]

Probably a technical issue, like they couldn't cram a camera into there, or by doing so the cost would change, and was therefore a bad move. Something like that.

Well besides that, the iPod nano looks absolutely filthy. I would get one if I didn't have a Classic already.

[alent1234]

I think that the iPod Touch was definitely due a camera. They must have withdrawn it at the last moment. Its makes no sense otherwise.

with the manufacturing runs of these things and the lead time required, at the last moment probably means months ago.

i've read of reports of a few instances of iphone OS3 being recorded as far back as January of this year in SF. Apple probably had the design nailed down early this year and there was never a camera to begin with or they had problems in testing

[Evangelion]

Its that kind of attitude which has led to the range getting pretty stagnant.

I think it's pretty obvious that the reason for boring touch update is NOT because Apple is "out of ideas", but because they had technical problems with the camera (like the rumors said), so they went with plan B: drop the camera, and go ahead with the launch.

[goinskiing]

So does the new Touch (32 and 64) get the 3GS processor and RAM?

[macshill]

I call Apple greed on this one. Not wanting to cannibalizing the iPhone sales over giving customers the innovation they want... which was what Apple was originally created for!

They've dropped the 16GB to make customers who think the 8GB is too wimpy, upgrade to the 32GB. :mad:

Call me jaded, but who wants to bet AT&T had a say in nixing the camera/mic?

[redfirebird08]

I don't care about everything else... it was just an iPod show after all. BUT, I can't believe they kept the old hardware in the 16GB iPod Touch! You now have to spend $300 for the 32GB to get the Cortex-A8/PowerVR SGX.

They are purposefully playing down that fact to be able to sell last years hardware at today's prices. At least I understand the difference. Do you know how many people are going to pick up the 16GB Touch without realizing it doesn't have the same capabilities as the 32GB/64GB? All of these new games will be coming out and they will run really crappy on the 16GB because of the weak processor and graphics chip. Not to mention future OpenGL2 games won't run at all.

Actually they aren't even selling the 16 GB anymore. It's the 8 GB that you're talking about.

[Erwin-Br]

iPods are slowly being eclipsed by iPhones. The phoneless mp3/mediaplayer is dying. We all need to accept that.

Not until they DOUBLE the capacity of their batteries, it won't. Making phone calls, listening to music, playing video's and games... Your battery is empty before you know it.

[macshill]

I think it's pretty obvious that the reason for boring touch update is NOT because Apple is "out of ideas", but because they had technical problems with the camera (like the rumors said), so they went with plan B: drop the camera, and go ahead with the launch.

Then why wouldn't they say "we got a camera in the Touch, but due to a tech. issue, it will be delayed a month, but expect it"? The idea of them dropping it all together due to a small delay doesn't sound plausible.

[ipodtouch-user]

Probably a technical issue, like they couldn't cram a camera into there, or by doing so the cost would change, and was therefore a bad move. Something like that.

Well besides that, the iPod nano looks absolutely filthy. I would get one if I didn't have a Classic already.


They couldn't cram a camera in there?? They managed it with the nano apparently. Horrible ipod touch "upgrade".

[Cvstos]

No camera in the Touch means I'm not buying a new one. I'll stick with the 2G I got for free with my new MacBook Pro. I'm actually rather pissed because I really wanted that camera! The one in my cell phone is awful and I can't afford the iPhone plan.

[cuestakid]

I for one am estatic about the new touch. Would a camera have been nice? Yes. Should they have put that video camera on the touch as well? Absolutely. However the one thing that I have been waiting for almost two years is here 64GB! I already have an excellent GPS device so I don't care for that and I could care less about the video camera/camera; my blackberry already does that.

[DavoMrMac]

My little news video is online;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQn0cGTef3Q

Watch it if you can spare the time!

[cenetti]

ZUNE HD here I come.....:D

[cuestakid]

Then why wouldn't they say "we got a camera in the Touch, but due to a tech. issue, it will be delayed a month, but expect it"? The idea of them dropping it all together due to a small delay doesn't sound plausible.

thats why I think it was just a rumor-a rumor that appeared to be very real but not. Lets not forget the "other" thing that we didnt see; four guys from Liverpool.

[ipodtouch-user]

No camera in the Touch means I'm not buying a new one. I'll stick with the 2G I got for free with my new MacBook Pro. I'm actually rather pissed because I really wanted that camera! The one in my cell phone is awful and I can't afford the iPhone plan.

Exactly my situation Cvstos. I am also irritated with Apple. :mad:

[philipt42]

Why all the negativity?!
These are pretty nice updates. If I had any money, I might even buy the touch!:cool:

[Westside guy]

If the new Touch had a camera, I very well might have bought one - but my first-gen 16GB Touch is still working just fine. I disagree with the folks who think it's a "bad update" - increasing memory is always worthwhile - but there's nothing particularly compelling in the new models.

If the iPhone were available on a lower-priced plan, I'd just go that route - but not all of us use our phones enough to make spending an additional 70-100 dollars a month a reasonable option. Heck, right now on T-Mobile we're spending 75 bucks total for three lines. :D

[alent1234]

I think it's pretty obvious that the reason for boring touch update is NOT because Apple is "out of ideas", but because they had technical problems with the camera (like the rumors said), so they went with plan B: drop the camera, and go ahead with the launch.

yeah that's it

they remanufactured millions of ipod touches with different hardware in the matter of a week, rewrote the OS 3.1 software, QA'd it all and packed them up and had them in apple stores ready to sell today

[pimentoLoaf]

One question: why is the Yellow Nanopod special?

[Evangelion]

Then why wouldn't they say "we got a camera in the Touch, but due to a tech. issue, it will be delayed a month, but expect it"?

Apple doesn't talk about future products, they talk about products that they are releasing at that time. I can only think of two exceptions to that rule: AppleTV and Xserve RAID. And those two were a different case, since they were not an alternative to an existing Apple-product. Had they said that "soon iPod touch will have a camera as well, but not right now" the sales of the touch would have tanked, as people started waiting for the touch with camera that would be released "any day now".

The idea of them dropping it all together due to a small delay doesn't sound plausible.

Yes it does. And what makes you think it was a "small delay"? If it were just few weeks or something, they would have released it today, and said that it will be available by the end of the month. But since they didn't, you can be pretty damn sure that the problem is bigger, and therefore the delay would be bigger as well.

[SeaFox]

I'm surprised the iPod Touch didn't get a camera to begin with. And now the nano gets one? Who needs to take pictures/video with a nano? And where is 16 gb?
Who needs to take pictures/video with an iPod Touch? If I wanted to carry something as bulky as an iPod Touch/iPhone for a camera I'll just carry my digital camera.

Stupid comment was stupid.

Not until they DOUBLE the capacity of their batteries, it won't. Making phone calls, listening to music, playing video's and games... Your battery is empty before you know it.
But improving battery technology is more expensive and not as sexy as adding features most people would never use.

Also: to people complaining about the Touch: don't forget the 3GS performance internals on the 32/64 GB models. That's a nice update for people wanting to use the Touch for games.

New Nano is fabulous. One thing I am disappointed in is the iTunes tagging. It only tags songs if the radio broadcasters in your area support the feature (wonder how many of them there are :rolleyes:). Better idea would have been to put the time shuffling capability to use and have the Nano record a 30 second snippet of the song so it can be run through one of those services that identifies songs by comparing the sample to a database next time you hook up to sync.

[mosx]

Don't have time to reply to everything I want to reply to.

But I want to say that this iPod touch upgrade is terrible. No camera? Really? A $400 iPod touch misses out on a camera while a $149 iPod nano gets a crappy little video camera? How stupid is that!?

My contract with AT&T for my original iPhone has long since ended. That combined with the fact that its been a couple of years now since I got a new iPod really had me hoping for a proper update to the iPod touch.

But since Apple has become an even greedier company than Microsoft, they're going to lose my money all together. Had they come out with an iPod touch with a camera, I could have canceled AT&T, bought a new iPod touch (absolutely willing to buy the 64GB version), and Apple could have continued to take my money through that purchase and App Store purchases. But now, thanks to AT&T's horrible service (thats an understatement) and Apple's greed, Microsoft will be getting my money for a Zune HD (more powerful hardware FTW), and Verizon will be getting my money for phone service since they can actually provide phone service.

[redfirebird08]

However the one thing that I have been waiting for almost two years is here 64GB!

I am happy that they finally broke the 64 gig barrier but I will keep waiting until they break the 100 gig barrier, so probably 128 gigs. That's likely a year or two years from now. I'm not really that interested in the Apps stuff. All I've wanted for the past 4 years or so is a widescreen iPod with enough storage capacity to make it worth my money.

[cenetti]

We want new technology .... we want to have the newest and best gadget that is available to us....

That's why we troll these sites.... you think average consumer reads these boards??? they're still trying to figure out how to set up their alarm clocks!

Bumping memory is not even "news worthy" to me... Where is my HD cam, OLED screen.... or atleassssst HD output ? nada!

pfft! I want the newest and the best.... ZUNE HD gets my money this year...
Will see what happens next year...

[ipodtouch-user]

Why all the negativity?!
These are pretty nice updates. If I had any money, I might even buy the touch!:cool:

Offering a 64GB model (and that's it) of the touch is not much of an "update" as far as i'm concerned.

[bloodycape]

Shame apple doesn't believe in SD or microsd card slots on their devices. Maybe some day they will, After all they added fm radio to the Nano(and should have added to the Shuffle also, and would come in real handy at gym).

[Evangelion]

yeah that's it

they remanufactured millions of ipod touches with different hardware in the matter of a week, rewrote the OS 3.1 software, QA'd it all and packed them up and had them in apple stores ready to sell today

Just like they rewrote OS X for Intel in few months? Or maybe they were prepared for the Intel-switch long before they announced it?

Of course Apple has parallel designs in the pipeline. They had a touch with camera, and they had a touch without camera. The one with the camera had issues, so they went ahead and released the one without it. They had no need to rewrite everything, or ramp up production, since they were prepared for the possibility of shipping a touch with no camera.

[Clark Gable]

did the ipod touch get the iphone 3gs chipset and such in it? the camera would be nice but its not a selling point for me. storage is. I will be getting a new classic and a 64 ipod touch for when i need internetz and dont wanna carry around an ipod and a laptop

[mitchr]

so im really poed that the new ipod touches dont have cameras like y put them on the nano but not the touch ughhhh

[redfirebird08]

Offering a 64GB model (and that's it) of the touch is not much of an "update" as far as i'm concerned.

Why not? People have been wanting a high capacity widescreen iPod for years. Now they are finally reaching what I'd consider high capacity. I'm still not buying until they offer a 100+ gigs of storage, but at least they are starting to move closer to that number. They could probably offer a 128 gig Touch for $500 right now if they wanted. I'd buy it.

[The Samurai]

But I want to say that this iPod touch upgrade is terrible. No camera? Really? A $400 iPod touch misses out on a camera while a $149 iPod nano gets a crappy little video camera? How stupid is that!?



I think they done it intentionally - think about it, there would be a very little difference between the touch and the iPhone.

[HLdan]

Yeah i'm pretty disappointed, even though them shuffles are very cute.

If Apple are not carful there going to run into people calling them all sorts along the line of 'lacking innovation of late'.

To some people SL has been a stop gap, no real noticeable changes because they are all under the hood and now these iPods which lets face it, are nothing special.

A camera, thats inventive, who didn't see that one coming.

Had to chuckle on your choice of words. "Careful". Dude, wake up to reality, Apple can sell a bottle of water and call it innovation and people will buy it, because Apple products are cool. The only persons that will gripe about innovation are you and every other geek.
For a lot of others these upgrades are amazing, especially to people that have never owned an Apple product and are considering one. Please think out of the box instead of your geek world of thinking.

[goinskiing]

did the ipod touch get the iphone 3gs chipset and such in it? the camera would be nice but its not a selling point for me. storage is. I will be getting a new classic and a 64 ipod touch for when i need internetz and dont wanna carry around an ipod and a laptop

This is what I'm wanting to know.

[Clark Gable]

so im really poed that the new ipod touches dont have cameras like y put them on the nano but not the touch ughhhh

me too. Why put a camera in the ipod with the smallest screen? seems if they were going to add it you need to add it to the ipod touch first and maybe classic before the nano because of the screen size

[Andy-V]

The camera either was never in the touch or was dropped a lot earlier on. It wasn't dropped in the last few weeks otherwise that means they have done no testing on the new faster models.

[sparks9]

that was a pretty lame event

[.Andy]

I think they done it intentionally - think about it, there would be a very little difference between the touch and the iPhone.
Why would this be a problem?

[aikomhoch]

One question: why is the Yellow Nanopod special?

That's my question too. My son has gift cards to Target and wants the yellow one. Strange.

[Sakura Eclair]

I'm more disappointed than pissed at not having a camera on the iPod Touch. guess that Apple felt that the Touch was cannibalizing on the Sales of the iPhone more than they wanted (20 million iPod Touches vs. 31 million iPhones).

[aaquib]

Offering a 64GB model (and that's it) of the touch is not much of an "update" as far as i'm concerned.

2X the space, faster graphics, faster processor. Same price. It's an "update" to me.

[ipodtouch-user]

That's my question too. My son has gift cards to Target and wants the yellow one. Strange.

Because it looks lemony and delicious :)

[Sakura Eclair]

Why would this be a problem?

The problem from Apple's point of view is that an iPod Touch with Camera would eat into sales of the iPhone as a lot of users would consider keeping their current phone with a Touch that did almost everything the iPhone does without having to do a contract.

AT least that is what I was looking for (64 GB capacity with camera would be killer).

[Clark Gable]

Because it looks lemony and delicious :)

thats what she said

[pimentoLoaf]

... That's why we troll these sites....

... pfft! I want the newest and the best.... ZUNE HD gets my money this year...

Really? All the extra features (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/09/apple-releases-iphone-os-3-1-for-iphone-and-ipod-touch/) disdained for a primitive clunky clone?

[CristobalHuet]

http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/facepalm.jpg

LOL at the claims of Zune HD in here. bahahahahah.

[alent1234]

Just like they rewrote OS X for Intel in few months? Or maybe they were prepared for the Intel-switch long before they announced it?

Of course Apple has parallel designs in the pipeline. They had a touch with camera, and they had a touch without camera. The one with the camera had issues, so they went ahead and released the one without it. They had no need to rewrite everything, or ramp up production, since they were prepared for the possibility of shipping a touch with no camera.

it's a lot different with hardware. Apple engineers have to work with the engineers of the companies that manufacture the devices and the chip makers, write the software, they have to set up and tool the assembly lines, but the parts months before manufacturing starts, etc. first they make a few test devices and if they work they go full manufacturing.

to have parallel devices would mean they would have had to buy some parts that won't get used and will be junked. very unlikely.

even in the PPC days most of the insides of a Mac were the same as a PC except for the CPU and the chipsets on the motherboard. so it wasn't a big deal to have test x86 versions. the intel P3 CPU was good, P4 was crap and the current Core 2 Duo's trace their roots back to the P3 with the P4 line having been killed off years ago.

[lukewright]

Everything I'm reading on Apple.com suggests that the 8GB touch is basically still the 2nd Gen version - just cheaper.

Apple.com differentiates on this page http://www.apple.com/ipod/compare-ipod-models/

and only the 32/64 models mention 'better performance, richer graphics'

Anyway else come to that conclusion?

[Mattie Num Nums]

The Zune isn't that bad.

Looks like Apple is force feeding the iPhone. :(

[Karvel]

In the iTunes installer it says:

"• Sync with iPod nano (5th generation), iPod classic (Autumn 2009) and iPod touch (Autumn 2009)."

I've never seen them use the XX 2009 marker (only XX generation?) Does that mean we could get another iPod Touch/Classic - with camera - in the next few months, i.e. quicker than the timeline for a usual next refresh of the product line.

[alent1234]

The problem from Apple's point of view is that an iPod Touch with Camera would eat into sales of the iPhone as a lot of users would consider keeping their current phone with a Touch that did almost everything the iPhone does without having to do a contract.

AT least that is what I was looking for (64 GB capacity with camera would be killer).

makes me glad i got a 3GS instead of waiting for the Touch. now i can take photos and videos of my son anywhere. if the Touch had a camera i would have used 3G via my work blackberry

[ipodtouch-user]

2X the space, faster graphics, faster processor. Same price. It's an "update" to me.

Apple has had 120GB capacity on its classic for years -- if it wanted to, it could easily produce and sell equivalent touches/iphones.

But, as people are realizing, it's all about the money for Apple - through little incremental upgrades.

[alent1234]

In the iTunes installer it says:

"• Sync with iPod nano (5th generation), iPod classic (Autumn 2009) and iPod touch (Autumn 2009)."

I've never seen them use the XX 2009 marker (only XX generation?) Does that mean we could get another iPod Touch/Classic - with camera - in the next few months, i.e. quicker than the timeline for a usual next refresh of the product line.

only if the manufacturing rumors were true or they redesigned it due to all the exploding ipod stories

[WolfgangK]

I don't understand Apple trying to protect the iPhone. An iPod Touch, is about $299...an iPhone costs you roughly $1200, per year!

The cost difference, is substantial to say the least. I'm certainly smarting from the exclusion of a camera on the Touch(would have bought a new 32gb, like yesterday)...but I'm certainly NOT going to alternatively spend $1200 instead!

Just a blatant move by Apple, unless there were technical difficulties as rumored. They left a lot of money on the table today. At least $300 of mine, for sure. For now I'll stick with my 1G iPod Touch.

[Jman888]

when can i buy the new touch. i want it right now!

[gorjan]

Just like they rewrote OS X for Intel in few months? Or maybe they were prepared for the Intel-switch long before they announced it?

Well now, when Steve announced the Intel-transition he also admitted that Apple have had an Intel-version of every OS X running in their HQ.

[ipodtouch-user]

The problem from Apple's point of view is that an iPod Touch with Camera would eat into sales of the iPhone as a lot of users would consider keeping their current phone with a Touch that did almost everything the iPhone does without having to do a contract.

AT least that is what I was looking for (64 GB capacity with camera would be killer).

You hit the nail right on the head -- this is EXACTLY what this is all about. The touch can't be allowed to have almost the same capabilities as the iPhone. Almost makes me want to throw my touch away, and go to Microsoft's zune, I am so disgusted right now.

[diamond.g]

did the ipod touch get the iphone 3gs chipset and such in it? the camera would be nice but its not a selling point for me. storage is. I will be getting a new classic and a 64 ipod touch for when i need internetz and dont wanna carry around an ipod and a laptop

Yes, that is the only way OGLES 2.0 is supported.

[bloodycape]

Really? All the extra features (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/09/apple-releases-iphone-os-3-1-for-iphone-and-ipod-touch/) disdained for a primitive clunky clone?

Zune HD has something many would say ipods lacks. The Zune line has sound quality that most would rate better than the ipod line and for some(like me, and many audiophiles) that is a key feature because after all this is a media/audio player first.

[salamence502]

Thanks apple for the camera on the touch! It's the only reason I've been waiting for the 3G.

...wait, what's that? No camera? Go to hell, Apple.

[mosx]

I think they done it intentionally - think about it, there would be a very little difference between the touch and the iPhone.

Which is exactly what I want. I've had an iPhone since the beginning. AT&T's service is the worst in this country. I want an iPod touch that is basically an iPhone without AT&T.

[redfirebird08]

Apple has had 120GB capacity on its classic for years -- if it wanted to, it could easily produce and sell equivalent touches/iphones.

But, as people are realizing, it's all about the money for Apple - through little incremental upgrades.

The Classic has a slow-spinning hard drive that can't even properly handle the iPhone operating system. The iPhone and Touch have flash memory, which is able to handle the operating system and also allows a thinner profile for the device. I really couldn't care less about how thin the device is. I just want more storage. Flash is far more expensive than hard drives, so we are kind of stuck waiting for Flash prices to keep going down. Or Apple could be generous enough to allow memory upgrades with SD slots (lol that will NEVER happen).

[ipodtouch-user]

The Classic has a slow-spinning hard drive that can't even properly handle the iPhone operating system. The iPhone and Touch have flash memory, which is able to handle the operating system and also allows a thinner profile for the device. I really couldn't care less about how thin the device is. I just want more storage. Flash is far more expensive than hard drives, so we are kind of stuck waiting for Flash prices to keep going down. Or Apple could be generous enough to allow memory upgrades with SD slots (lol that will NEVER happen).

I concede point #1 to you.

I stand by the second one.

[SwiftLives]

One question: why is the Yellow Nanopod special?

If I were a conspiracy theorist, I'd assume it was because they ended up scrapping an announcement about a special-edition band-themed iPod nano. But for the life of me, I can't think of a band that sings about anything yellow...

My pragmatic side thinks they forgot to turn the "Apple Exclusive" layer off in Photoshop when they were saving the yellow nano image file.

[Clark Gable]

The Classic has a slow-spinning hard drive that can't even properly handle the iPhone operating system. The iPhone and Touch have flash memory, which is able to handle the operating system and also allows a thinner profile for the device. I really couldn't care less about how thin the device is. I just want more storage. Flash is far more expensive than hard drives, so we are kind of stuck waiting for Flash prices to keep going down. Or Apple could be generous enough to allow memory upgrades with SD slots (lol that will NEVER happen).

in 4-5 years the spinning hard drives will be pretty well phased out like floppy drives now. ssd's are a booming market. and the ipod classic is built mainly just for storage, not for running a bunch of apps and internet browsers. Its like saying a mini cooper is bad because it cant haul a big trailer like a pickup can

[CristobalHuet]

If I were a conspiracy theorist, I'd assume it was because they ended up scrapping an announcement about a special-edition band-themed iPod nano. But for the life of me, I can't think of a band that sings about anything yellow...

My pragmatic side thinks they forgot to turn the "Apple Exclusive" layer off in Photoshop when they were saving the yellow nano image file.

Coldplay: Yellow.

Just sayin...:D

[harodude]

I was really hoping for an FM radio accross the entire line... Seems silly to throw all the features into a middle ended device.
I go fishing alot and this would have really helped when I'm out for hours at a time in the SF bay, as a variable addition to my Already extensive library..

Maybe next rev!

[ocva]

As an iPod touch owner, I'm definitely fine with this. I can see why people who have a need for a camera + PMP might be disappointed. But specifically as an iPod touch owner, why would I be upset? It's not like the iPod touch I'm typing this on would have magically gotten a camera. Why would I want to be pushed into spending $300 on a device that is painfully similar to one I already own?

32gb touches have only been around for about a year. I'm fine with hanging onto a nice piece of (expensive) tech for (!!!!!) 2 years.

[SwiftLives]

Coldplay: Yellow.

Just sayin...:D

I was thinking more along the lines of animated submersibles.

[dambrosir]

Probably a technical issue, like they couldn't cram a camera into there, or by doing so the cost would change, and was therefore a bad move. Something like that.

Well besides that, the iPod nano looks absolutely filthy. I would get one if I didn't have a Classic already.

So lets say it was technical issues. Everyone goes out buys a new ipod touch then in the spring Apple come out with an ipod touch with a camera. How many people want to bet that Apple does that.

[PeterQVenkman]

That new nano is starting to grow on me. It will paly back my videos, with a built in speaker.

That's pretty damn sexy.

Plus the nano is one tough little player. You can throw it down the stairs. I wouldn't try that with a touch.

[Primejimbo]

nano = nice update!

classic = yippee, it lives on! Of course they had a 160gb version two years ago, so nothing new here...


itunes = more bloat to make it even slower! Can we please get a de-featured no store, music only itunes lite please?

But the 160GB before was bigger and a lot more. I am so happy they kept it, and iTunes runs great on my Mac and very fast.

Am I the only one who still loves a Classic?

Love em, love em, love em. I have a Classic for "normal" use, a 1G nano for the gym and a 3G iPhone for ... a phone. I'm thrilled with that lineup.

I like Apple.

ps: I won't be buying anything introduced today. No need.
I love the classic also and do the same as you. The classic is my main music player that has all my music and the 16GB nano (for working out) and the iPhone only hold music I listen too a lot. I hope they keep the Classic for years to come and just add more storage to it. I hope to see a 300 plus GB one someday (even if I don't need it lol)

[redfirebird08]

in 4-5 years the spinning hard drives will be pretty well phased out like floppy drives now. ssd's are a booming market. and the ipod classic is built mainly just for storage, not for running a bunch of apps and internet browsers. Its like saying a mini cooper is bad because it cant haul a big trailer like a pickup can

It'd be nice if they went ahead and introduced a $500 128 gig Touch. I would buy the damn thing and I'm sure quite a few other people would too. I remember back when the first color iPods came out they were VERY expensive. For crying out loud, my 30 gig iPod Photo cost around $375 and that was WITH a student discount.

[nagromme]

Remember back when Apple promised a camera in the Touch?

Me neither :)

I bet the platform will "somehow" survive despite the Zune's (future, hoped for) amazing app store and developer base (which I'm assuming might one day equal Apple's).

Any time that too little changes to please a tiny minority of dedicated rumor-trackers, Apple is "stagnating"... even though Apple's "stagnation" innovates faster than any competitor :p

[iPhone3GCrazed]

I love the iPod Classic and it will be the only iPod I ever buy (save for an orange shuffle I bought 2 or 3 years ago)

I vowed to myself that I would never buy an iPod Nano. I just plain don't like them.

I don't like the iPod touches... Way overpriced for what you get. You get an iPhone with no phone, data or message service but for the same price. The iPod Touch is perfect for people who don't have AT&T. But if you have AT&T and want an iPod Touch, get an iPhone... you won't regret it.

As for the iPod Shuffles... I'd like to see the physical controls back, plain and simple.


I would have really loved a camera on the iPod Classic, but I still love it nonetheless. I'm surprised that the iPod Touch didn't get a camera.

Did anyone else find it strange that the camera on the iPod Nano is on the bottom left side of the back. I would just think that someone would naturally hold it from the bottom and the finger might get in the way... I mean personally I wouldn't want to smudge up the screen by holding it there so my finger doesn't get in the way. I think it would have been better to place it on top, like where the iPhone's is.

[CisternaChyli]

again guys, didnt anyone look at the homescreen of the ipod touch and notice no camera app? or was i the only one??? :D. I knew this was gonan happen...now i can go buy another 2G in peace...my sister will prolly exchange hers but im alright..i can live with the 16 gb capacity.

[Speedy2]

Zune HD has something many would say ipods lacks. The Zune line has sound quality that most would rate better than the ipod line and for some(like me, and many audiophiles) that is a key feature because after all this is a media/audio player first.

Do you have a solid source to backup that claim?

[droz]

The problem from Apple's point of view is that an iPod Touch with Camera would eat into sales of the iPhone as a lot of users would consider keeping their current phone with a Touch that did almost everything the iPhone does without having to do a contract.

AT least that is what I was looking for (64 GB capacity with camera would be killer).

Apple doesn't give a rat's *** about subscription revenue. AT&T does.

[mrcc]

I saved me $300 dollars today. I am a big apple fan. Today as a big apple fan im broken hearted. I was going to sell my ipod touch 2g for the ipod touch with camera. hmmm shall i cough up for the $$$ for the nano with the camera. and radio? its tempting but im hoping the rumors come true. but if they dont release a camera. why did i spend 300 dollars for such a expensive device. i should of gotten a nano and a cheap netbook for the same price as the ipod touch. I do agree the fact that today we should morn the death of the mp3 player. Apple is running out of ideas. Thanks apple. I also think that there trying to market the iphone more than the ipod now. If they didnt have the iphone i think that the ipod touch would of have a camera.

[Hellium]

I am super-disappointed:mad:

[ipodtouch-user]

I was thinking more along the lines of animated submersibles.

It's true -- from a certain perspective that yellow nano can look pretty submarine-ish.

[Primejimbo]

I love the iPod Classic and it will be the only iPod I ever buy (save for an orange shuffle I bought 2 or 3 years ago)

I vowed to myself that I would never buy an iPod Nano. I just plain don't like them.

I don't like the iPod touches... Way overpriced for what you get. You get an iPhone with no phone, data or message service but for the same price. The iPod Touch is perfect for people who don't have AT&T. But if you have AT&T and want an iPod Touch, get an iPhone... you won't regret it.

As for the iPod Shuffles... I'd like to see the physical controls back, plain and simple.


I would have really loved a camera on the iPod Classic, but I still love it nonetheless. I'm surprised that the iPod Touch didn't get a camera.

Did anyone else find it strange that the camera on the iPod Nano is on the bottom left side of the back. I would just think that someone would naturally hold it from the bottom and the finger might get in the way... I mean personally I wouldn't want to smudge up the screen by holding it there so my finger doesn't get in the way. I think it would have been better to place it on top, like where the iPhone's is.

I love my classic also, but I would never use it to work out. HDD+running and jumping around=not good. It's also on the bigger side to carry. The only reason I bought a Nano was for working out, so no moving parts (like a HDD).

I might get a Touch for my daughter for Christmas and I hope they have some refurb ones in the Apple Store by then to save some money. My Nano is a refurb and I love it.

[FCPnewbie]

September 9, 2009: Apple has officially run out of ideas for their iPods.

I don't think you guys see the significance here. The touch getting a faster processor is the true sign of where this all is going. iPods of the near future will be used much the same way we're using laptops today. To get there they've got to cram more processing power and memory into them... or have them be able to access cloud computing.

Apple hasn't run out of ideas, but are in the middle of a transitional period waiting for all the pieces to fall into place.

[Primejimbo]

I don't think you guys see the significance here. The touch getting a faster processor is the true sign of where this all is going. iPods of the near future will be used much the same way we're using laptops today. To get there they've got to cram more processing power and memory into them... or have them be able to access cloud computing.

Apple hasn't run out of ideas, but are in the middle of a transitional period waiting for all the pieces to fall into place.
I am happy about all of this and it's to a point no matter what Apple did people will cry and bi*ch about it.

[WolfgangK]

I don't like the iPod touches... Way overpriced for what you get. You get an iPhone with no phone, data or message service but for the same price. The iPod Touch is perfect for people who don't have AT&T. But if you have AT&T and want an iPod Touch, get an iPhone... you won't regret it.

Again. The price difference here, is (roughly) $299, vs. $1200(< per year!). I would argue that your iPhone is overpriced. and I'm not just speaking to it's $900 camera. A lot of people here blinded by the unconscious pain of handing AT&T $1200 every year. With Skype, I get 90% of the functionality with my iPod that an iPhone user gets. Who's getting ripped off???

[Clark Gable]

I just want a 128gb+ ssd in an ipod classic mainly because of the reliability. The 1.8 inch drive isnt built for much in the way of shock absorbing if you run and what not. Pls the fact ssd have a real low failure rate.

The nano is too small of screen for me and im not a huge fan of the ipod touch because I like physical controls and its quite a bit easier to not constantly be having to take out the ipod touch to look at where i need to tough to even skip a song.

[Axl Rose]

apple is really trying to **** customers with that 8gb touch

[Marlon1217]

Am I the only one who still loves a Classic?

Love em, love em, love em. I have a Classic for "normal" use, a 1G nano for the gym and a 3G iPhone for ... a phone. I'm thrilled with that lineup.

I like Apple.

ps: I won't be buying anything introduced today. No need.

I still love the Classic too!
i still have my classic from 2007 when it was first introduced and its still here, i love that thing

I was considering buying the ipod touch when there was rumors about the camera. but i guess not.

i'll stick with my classic

[AtHomeBoy_2000]

Current (now known as last gen) Touches run Skype.

I was not aware of that. interesting.

[redfirebird08]

I just want a 128gb+ ssd in an ipod classic mainly because of the reliability. The 1.8 inch drive isnt built for much in the way of shock absorbing if you run and what not. Pls the fact ssd have a real low failure rate.

The nano is too small of screen for me and im not a huge fan of the ipod touch because I like physical controls and its quite a bit easier to not constantly be having to take out the ipod touch to look at where i need to tough to even skip a song.

I'd be fine with a 128 gig SSD Classic if it had a widescreen. A lot of my favorite films are in the "Scope" 2.35:1 aspect ratio, which makes it difficult to watch on a tiny 4:3 screen.

[tbrinkma]

It'd be nice if they went ahead and introduced a $500 128 gig Touch. I would buy the damn thing and I'm sure quite a few other people would too. I remember back when the first color iPods came out they were VERY expensive. For crying out loud, my 30 gig iPod Photo cost around $375 and that was WITH a student discount.

Would you buy it if it were a $600 128 gig Touch?
Going from 8GB to 32GB (24GB) bumps the price $100.
Going from 32GB to 64GB (32GB) bumps the price $100.
What makes you think going from 64GB to 128GB (64GB) would only bump the price $100.

[redfirebird08]

Would you buy it if it were a $600 128 gig Touch?
Going from 8GB to 32GB (24GB) bumps the price $100.
Going from 32GB to 64GB (32GB) bumps the price $100.
What makes you think going from 64GB to 128GB (64GB) would only bump the price $100.

I'd buy it if it was $600, yes. It's something I've been wanting for a long time so I'd pay that price to get it right now.

[iPhone3GCrazed]

Again. The price difference here, is (roughly) $299, vs. $1200(< per year!). I would argue that your iPhone is overpriced. and I'm not just speaking to it's $900 camera. A lot of people here blinded by the unconscious pain of handing AT&T $1200 every year. With Skype, I get 90% of the functionality with my iPod that an iPhone user gets. Who's getting ripped off???

We're on a family plan, all we did was add $30/Month extra for data, so really it's not $1200/year, it's really only $360/year... for me anyway... which is pretty palpable for what it offers. I see where you're coming from though.

[AtHomeBoy_2000]

Everything I'm reading on Apple.com suggests that the 8GB touch is basically still the 2nd Gen version - just cheaper.

Apple.com differentiates on this page http://www.apple.com/ipod/compare-ipod-models/

and only the 32/64 models mention 'better performance, richer graphics'

Anyway else come to that conclusion?

I am wondering if they are doing this like they did to the iPhone 3G and 3GS.

My opinion is that they did this to make a cheap touch and then they will "upgrade" the 32 and 64 versions to a new camera model when it becomes available.

[tbrinkma]

Again. The price difference here, is (roughly) $299, vs. $1200(< per year!). I would argue that your iPhone is overpriced. and I'm not just speaking to it's $900 camera. A lot of people here blinded by the unconscious pain of handing AT&T $1200 every year. With Skype, I get 90% of the functionality with my iPod that an iPhone user gets. Who's getting ripped off???

Nobody. A touch-user with Skype gets phone access just about anywhere that they'd be able to borrow access to someone's land-line anyway, and an iPhone-user with Skype gets phone access just about anywhere with line of sight to an electron.

[Clark Gable]

I'd be fine with a 128 gig SSD Classic if it had a widescreen. A lot of my favorite films are in the "Scope" 2.35:1 aspect ratio, which makes it difficult to watch on a tiny 4:3 screen.

maybe apple should make the screen bigger like a bigger version of the nano. Im not a fan of the oval alien shape though. just more screen please

[dambrosir]

Apple doesn't talk about future products, they talk about products that they are releasing at that time. I can only think of two exceptions to that rule: AppleTV and Xserve RAID. And those two were a different case, since they were not an alternative to an existing Apple-product. Had they said that "soon iPod touch will have a camera as well, but not right now" the sales of the touch would have tanked, as people started waiting for the touch with camera that would be released "any day now".



Yes it does. And what makes you think it was a "small delay"? If it were just few weeks or something, they would have released it today, and said that it will be available by the end of the month. But since they didn't, you can be pretty damn sure that the problem is bigger, and therefore the delay would be bigger as well.
couldn't the camera in new ipod touch be the same as the one in the iphone? So why would there be a technical issue?

[Toddgabweg]

Apple could have had $300 from me today if the new iPod Touch had a built in camera with video. The iPod Touch update is lame.


Same here... I am disappointed- I waited a long time for this "update"...

[bloodycape]

They should have also added HD radio along with FM on the Nano.

[turtlebud]

So lets say it was technical issues. Everyone goes out buys a new ipod touch then in the spring Apple come out with an ipod touch with a camera. How many people want to bet that Apple does that.

good news is that I get a bit more life out of my 2G touch then. guess i'll have to wait til next year to spring for a new touch now - more capacity + speed isn't enough of a reason for me to spend $400. why do you need 64GB if you're not taking video or pictures?

[ipodtouch-user]

couldn't the camera in new ipod touch be the same as the one in the iphone? So why would there be a technical issue?

Another thing that makes one wonder, isn't it.

Pretty fishy if you ask me. They've had a friggin camera in the iPhone for months now, so what's the deal here??

[scottness]

One question: why is the Yellow Nanopod special?

Yellow Submarine? ;)

[macfearless]

what game are they showing on the iphone?

[redfirebird08]

why do you need 64GB if you're not taking video or pictures?

lolwut?

How about because some of us have large audio and video libraries? I'm still waiting on a 100+ gig Touch. ;)

[gr81mgbgt]

In all honesty, I'm pissed. It would have been nice to see a major update.

With the Zune HD coming out in a couple of days, OLED Screen, HD radio, wireless,HD-compatible video,full web browser, Nvidia's much-hyped Tegra chipset, sleek new design, lower price, YOU WOULD THINK apple would be on the ball with the ipod touch update, GUESS NOT.

[tekboi]

Horrible Updates, everything... HORRIBLE.

[ipodtouch-user]

Yellow Submarine? ;)

Yes - although, contrary to what Yoko Ono said, the Beatles catalog did not get released on itunes.

[iPhone3GCrazed]

I love my classic also, but I would never use it to work out. HDD+running and jumping around=not good. It's also on the bigger side to carry. The only reason I bought a Nano was for working out, so no moving parts (like a HDD).

I might get a Touch for my daughter for Christmas and I hope they have some refurb ones in the Apple Store by then to save some money. My Nano is a refurb and I love it.

That's true about the HDD, could be an issue when running, which is a good reason to get a Nano. Refurbs are the best, almost got a refurb Macbook then they came out with updates earlier this year:rolleyes:

[voltare]

Can the new nano only shoot video??? Looking at the Apple site, it seems like the it can shoot video but not take pictures? Isn't that a little crazy?

[bloodycape]

Do you have a solid source to backup that claim?

The couple of reviews I have read, and. discussions on other forums. Plus, I have a Mini with rockbox, and compared it to friends Zune, and with the same phones Sennheiser HD465 I found the Zune to sound better.

[ipodtouch-user]

Actually, that's $20. Learn how to do some math.


Horrible Updates, everything... HORRIBLE.


Actually - I think he meant that the 8GB touch went from $229 to $199.

But anyway, I agree with you, horrible "update".

[ibjoshua]

couldn't the camera in new ipod touch be the same as the one in the iphone? So why would there be a technical issue?

Excellent point. I was thinking the same thing.

I would have been very disappointed if my new [hypothetical] touch had the same piece of crap camera that is in the latest Nanos -- has anyone actually watched the sample videos (http://www.apple.com/ipodnano/features/video-camera.html)? If they're the best that Apple marketing can squeeze out of that camera imagine how bad user's videos will look. In fact its very existence in the Nano suggests that maybe something better was planned higher up the iPod line which would have taken attention away from this crappy little webcam.

[strausd]

i honestly think that one day Apple sits down, thinks of tons of ideas, then spreads them out over 15 years. one idea per year. they dont think they will be smart and creative enough to think of ideas when they really need to. they just do it all at once and forget about it. i also think its stupid how they didnt put a video camera on the touch. sure, maybe its because of some problems, but its basically the same as an iphone besides the whole phone and gps part. i find it interesting how they didnt have trouble putting it on the nano and not the touch. and speaking of gps, they really need that in the touches too. Apple, come on.

[TheBritishBloke]

Actually it's a $20 price drop. Learn to do some maths. Horrible Updates, everything... HORRIBLE.

I saw it before you edited it. No need to be so rude, especially when you got it wrong... The fact that it was $229, and is now $199... that's $30...

Please don't be so rude from now on, especially if you're not right.

[gr81mgbgt]

I just think a camera was never intended for the ipod touch.

[ipodtouch-user]

i honestly think that one day Apple sits down, thinks of tons of ideas, then spreads them out over 15 years. one idea per year. they dont think they will be smart and creative enough to think of ideas when they really need to. they just do it all at once and forget about it. i also think its stupid how they didnt put a video camera on the touch. sure, maybe its because of some problems, but its basically the same as an iphone besides the whole phone and gps part. i find it interesting how they didnt have trouble putting it on the nano and not the touch. and speaking of gps, they really need that in the touches too. Apple, come on.

Noooo - I believe apple will never put GPS on the ipod touch - that would too closely approximate iPhone functionality.

[AtHomeBoy_2000]

I just think a camera was never intended for the ipod touch.

there was too much anecdotal and physical evidence to say otherwise.

[strausd]

I just think a camera was never intended for the ipod touch.

maybe not. they might wana keep a fine line between the touch and the iPhone. but honestly, they should at least give touch users a little more than what they got now.

[strausd]

Noooo - I believe apple will never put GPS on the ipod touch - that would too closely approximate iPhone functionality.

maybe not, but touch users deserve more than what they are getting now.

[Bodhi395]

Just wondering if the camera on the nano can take still pictures or only video? Anyone know?

If its only video and no still pictures, thats pretty dumb. I think it would be cool to have a digital still camera the size of the nano to come in handy on all kinds of occasions.

[redfirebird08]

maybe not, but touch users deserve more than what they are getting now.

Yes, around 64 gigs more. ;):D

[benfilan]

Couple of thoughts..

iPod Nano can take video but not photos?

Why no camera on the Touch?

[gr81mgbgt]

Agreed.

[ipodtouch-user]

maybe not, but touch users deserve more than what they are getting now.

Oh, I totally agree with you.

[bloodycape]

Agreed.

An AMOLED screen?

[gr81mgbgt]

Oh, I totally agree with you.

What happened today? I would hate to see whats going to happen with the imacs and cinema displays whenever they get "updated"......

[gr81mgbgt]

An AMOLED screen?

Yes! Seems like were going backwards

[ipodtouch-user]

Couple of thoughts..

iPod Nano can take video but not photos?

I would seriously hope that's not the case.

Why no camera on the Touch?

Because Apple is stupid (or greedy - depends on your point of view).

[bloodycape]

Yes! Seems like were going backwards

I guess you must look at somewhere else for AMOLED/OLED screen.

About the Nano's camera, I got this from another site but it make sense.
"Strangely, I see a bit of logic in the Nano-Cam, as the Nano has become the true entry-level iPod, e.g. the iPod parents buy for their tweens/teens, and it is that demographic that appears to be most YouTube obsessed - Now they have a YouTube Cam within reach at all times - Sadly"

[gr81mgbgt]

I would seriously hope that's not the case.



Because Apple is stupid (or greedy - depends on your point of view).


NOT THINKING.....

[flottenheimer]

The biggest surprise was FM radio... In an iPod. Tought it would never happen.

[dkovalev]

Delete

[rgarjr]

Just wondering if the camera on the nano can take still pictures or only video? Anyone know?

If its only video and no still pictures, thats pretty dumb. I think it would be cool to have a digital still camera the size of the nano to come in handy on all kinds of occasions.

interesting point. They really dont say if it takes still shots.

[fun173]

i think there were some production problems here, none of this makes any sense there is still an 8 gb ipod touch i think they should have eliminated 8 and change it to 16 and also why would the nano get a camera and not the touch? wtf

[gr81mgbgt]

interesting point. They really dont say if it takes still shots.

very very good point.if it doesn't take still shots, wow. period.

anyone got one yet?

[APPLENEWBIE]

the more I think about it, the more confuseder I get about this whole ipod touch issue.

Lets go back to the (short-lived) early morning repricing of the iPod lineup. None of those (revised) prices bear resemblance to what actually happened.

Original Price/Morning Price/Keynote price
Nano 8 gb $149 / 129 / $149
Nano 16gb $199 / 149 / 179

Touch 8 gb $229 / 189 / 199
Touch 16 gb 299 / 249 / 299
Touch 32 gb 399 /279(!) / 399

What the heck was that all about??

[ibjoshua]

About the Nano's camera, I got this from another site but it make sense.
"Strangely, I see a bit of logic in the Nano-Cam, as the Nano has become the true entry-level iPod, e.g. the iPod parents buy for their tweens/teens, and it is that demographic that appears to be most YouTube obsessed - Now they have a YouTube Cam within reach at all times - Sadly"

That's a good point and to be honest Apple don't really care what a minority of Apple trainspotters like us think.

[orangermac]

The price drops on the old line didn't make sense to me. Now it does make better sense with a jump from 8GB to 32GB models, but at the time I read this I was thinking maybe we were going to have a totally rebranded product. An iPhone sans phone product where you paid for a 2yr data subscription ($40 per month?) and got the device somewhat subsidized.

With the missing camera (or magnetometer which would have been great for games), I'm guessing that this device may be on deck for a later release...

I, like so many of you, was ready to purchase an updated iPod Touch with a camera. Now, I think I'll just wait things out with my 1st Gen 8GB.

[MikeT]

i think there were some production problems here, none of this makes any sense there is still an 8 gb ipod touch i think they should have eliminated 8 and change it to 16 and also why would the nano get a camera and not the touch? wtf

Totally agree. This "update" is just too half-assed to have any other explanation besides production problems. Something went wrong somewhere. It was rumored a few days ago that there was some sort of glitch with the camera modules, and that's probably what happened. In a couple months or so, the camera-equipped Touch will undoubtedly appear.

[diamond3]

Touch 8 gb $229 / 189 / 199
Touch 16 gb 299 / 249 / 299
Touch 32 gb 399 /279(!) / 399

What the heck was that all about??

Just of note, There is no 16gb.

Touch 32 gb 399/279/299
Touch 64 gb ----/----/399

[Macman1993]

So the nano also gets video effects before the iphone, how does that make any sense?

[MrYohan]

I was in the market for a new Nano, but I most certainly don't want a camera. I can't carry a camera in my job (automotive). I hope to get ahold of a previous generation Nano, but I bet they did a good job of clearing stock before launching the new gen.

The fact that there was no camera upgrade in the touch is obviously in order not to cannibalize iPhone sales, and the stunt with video recorders in the Nanos is obviously bcs all the kidz record ever more stupid video clips and share them on YouTube. :(

And the shuffle would've been great, had it had buttons.:mad:

[azentropy]

So the nano also gets video effects before the iphone, how does that make any sense?
In Apple's world. It is something they have done with their computers for years...

[QCassidy352]

No, we don't. I don't carry a phone around with me. I have a cell phone that often gets lost for a couple weeks before I find it again.

You are in a very small minority. I don't know anyone, including my 80+ year old grandparents, who don't carry a cell at all times (outside the house).

This is a HUGE disappointment for us ipod touch 2G users. How lame is it to offer video camera and built-in mic for the nano, and nothing for the touch. The storage upgrades (to 64GB) are practically worthless...

Wow. I guess I would much rather have a 32GB nano than a video camera...

Thus proving, once again, that you cannot please all of the people all of the time. I don't know why I even read these boards after a keynote - it's the same whining and complaining every single time, no matter what apple does or doesn't release (except after the iphone 3.0 event... most people liked that one).

I can just be glad that within a few days the newbies will go home, and we'll can go back to listening to the MR regulars complaining about how we don't have MMS yet.

[ipodtouch-user]

It was rumored a few days ago that there was some sort of glitch with the camera modules, and that's probably what happened. In a couple months or so, the camera-equipped Touch will undoubtedly appear.

Well, if that's the case, Apple still has some explaining to do -- they've had a camera in the iPhone for a while now, so what went on here?

[redfirebird08]

I was in the market for a new Nano, but I most certainly don't want a camera. I can't carry a camera in my job (automotive). I hope to get ahold of a previous generation Nano, but I bet they did a good job of clearing stock before launching the new gen.

The fact that there was no camera upgrade in the touch is obviously in order not to cannibalize iPhone sales, and the stunt with video recorders in the Nanos is obviously bcs all the kidz record ever more stupid video clips and share them on YouTube. :(

And the shuffle would've been great, had it had buttons.:mad:

Get one while they still have them (free shipping and no taxes):

http://www.amazon.com/iPod-Nanos-Computers/b/qid=1252531106/ref=sr_tc_2_2?ie=UTF8&node=15761351

[mosx]

I don't like the iPod touches... Way overpriced for what you get. You get an iPhone with no phone, data or message service but for the same price. The iPod Touch is perfect for people who don't have AT&T. But if you have AT&T and want an iPod Touch, get an iPhone... you won't regret it.

I have an iPhone on AT&T and I do regret it. AT&T's service over the last two years has been terrible. It's gotten progressively worse with time as well. There are so many dead zones in the greater Los Angeles area that its gone from wondering where you'll lose your signal to wondering where you'll actually have a signal.

Plus there is the issue of cost. The iPhone starts at $99. But you have to factor in a minimum of $39.99 a month for the lowest minute rate play, as well as $30 for the mandatory data plan, and at least another $5 for 200 SMS/MMS messages. Thats roughly $75 a month BEFORE taxes and fees pile on. You're looking at spending at least $80 a month when all is said and done. For the first year of service, you're looking at $100 for the iPhone plus roughly $960, so overall, $1060 roughly (give or take a few dollars after taxes and fees). Add on another $960 for the second year of the contract.

The iPod touch is a flat $299 (plus sales tax) for the same internal hardware as the iPhone 3G S with no additional fees, save for a $10 upgrade every year thanks to Apple deliberately misusing SOX.

The iPod touch is a much better overall deal. It's a pocket computer that does everything the iPhone does, minus mobile data and the camera. Theres no excuse for the lack of camera, considering those camera modules cost what? $2?

One can argue you'll have a cellphone anyway, so why not just make it an iPhone? Well, the majority of the US population lives in areas served by MetroPCS. $45 a month for unlimited everything. Why pay double to AT&T? Not to mention that the midwest and southern US also have regional carriers that beat the pants off AT&T when it comes to pricing as well. Plus other large carriers like T-Mobile and Boost offer significantly better rate plans than AT&T. With T-Mobile I can buy a phone at full retail and pre-pay monthly and enjoy all of the benefits of contracted service. So why should I buy an iPhone and be stuck with AT&T's expensive and extremely poor service? If I'm going to pay that much for monthly phone service, I'm going to Verizon or Sprint. At least I know I'll get coverage and be able to use my phone with them.

[Erasmus]

Sigh. How disappointing.

Hopefully the next one will have the camera and GPS in it that I want. Then again, next year I'll be almost finished Uni, hopefully have a job lined up, and might just by an iPhone.

[gr81mgbgt]

You are in a very small minority. I don't know anyone, including my 80+ year old grandparents, who don't carry a cell at all times (outside the house).





Thus proving, once again, that you cannot please all of the people all of the time. I don't know why I even read these boards after a keynote - it's the same whining and complaining every single time, no matter what apple does or doesn't release (except after the iphone 3.0 event... most people liked that one).

I can just be glad that within a few days the newbies will go home, and we'll can go back to listening to the MR regulars complaining about how we don't have MMS yet.

I understand, Most people are never happy with what they have, BUT this keynote was a joke.

[Macman1993]

You are in a very small minority. I don't know anyone, including my 80+ year old grandparents, who don't carry a cell at all times (outside the house).





Thus proving, once again, that you cannot please all of the people all of the time. I don't know why I even read these boards after a keynote - it's the same whining and complaining every single time, no matter what apple does or doesn't release (except after the iphone 3.0 event... most people liked that one).

I can just be glad that within a few days the newbies will go home, and we'll can go back to listening to the MR regulars complaining about how we don't have MMS yet.

PSST we already know when were getting MMS, were whining about no flash now.

NO FLASH WTF!!!

[A Macbook Pro]

Well I think I might keep my 2G touch and grab a PSP Go! for the money instead.

[strausd]

this is all i have to say about the ipod updates today: the people working at apple are all freaking retards

[gr81mgbgt]

this is all i have to say about the ipod updates today: the people working at apple are all freaking retards

Ratards.

[ipodtouch-user]

Thus proving, once again, that you cannot please all of the people all of the time. I don't know why I even read these boards after a keynote - it's the same whining and complaining every single time, no matter what apple does or doesn't release (except after the iphone 3.0 event... most people liked that one).



Yeah - except that, from all indications, not too many people were exactly enthralled and pleased by this Apple "event".

[jdiamond]

See the pattern? This was an iPod Nano event, and everyone slamming it (and Apple) are all iPod Touch users. Obviously, they're going to update the iPod Touch - the schedule just slid. So calm down.

I am still an iPod Nano user. Why? Because the Nano still has a touch wheel, and I find the interface for going through photos on the Touch just horrible. If only Apple allowed a 3rd party App to emulate a scroll wheel on the Touch, I'd be ready to switch over.

That being said, since 2001 I have been waiting for iPods to FINALLY get integrated FM Radio and audio recording, because only then can they replace my old fashioned audio stuff. Granted, I bought a bunch of add ons to get that functionality, but integrated is so much better. So for me, today's announcement was off the charts exciting! I was SO GLAD I held off last year buying a Nano.

Why no photos? Probably it's not a quality, high res sensor, and Apple wouldn't want a feature like photos if they looked crappy. Personally, I'd rather instead of video recording we got 32GB on the Nano - then I'd NEVER need a Touch,

So you see, Touch users: You complain about Apple drawing the line between the iPhone and Touch, but we Nano users have the same issue with the line between the Touch and Nano. The Nano doesn't even have an open API and App store, although I love the games. (And while it sucks to be forced to buy an iPhone, it's the only way Apple became a defacto platform.)

So if you are a Nano user, this iPod refresh couldn't be beat. And we deserve just once to get in the lime light - Apple finally acknowledged that they sell more Nanos than any other model.

But don't worry Touch users - I guarantee you you'll see an update. Still likely before XMAS.

As for Apple's greed vs inventiveness - they are greedy in the way they slowly dole out features (for example, FM radio was available for competitors for 5 years and is a no brainer), but they are really innovative in the smaller features everyone on this post ignored (I guess 'cause they're not in the market for Nanos), like live pause on radio and a complete software exercise trainer with a new standard hardware interface for exercise equipment that makes them "iPod trainer ready" - this goes way beyond the Nike shoes - Apple is now into the exercise business.

In summary - criticizing Apple on updates for a product you don't use is ridiculous - the early comment about being disappointed they didn't update the Touch yet says it all. Don't undercut the Nano - I can't think of a richer digital Swiss army knife in existence.

[mdriftmeyer]

The gaming platform without a camera has you all in a twitter?

[ericinboston]

The iPod Nano is a nice device. The rest of the announcement was a bit pointless.

Yeah...I thought this "event" was lacking a lot of new and exciting features for the entire iPod line.

A new video camera for the Nano?...cool...but it takes (as far as I can tell) subpar video compared to the iPhone.

No new capacity sizes in the Nano? Yawn...totally ruined it for me. So they raise the Nano in price and no capacity change...thanks.

I believe the iTouch increased in capacity but is still a crazy price to pay.

I think Apple, overall, is very confused about what it wants to to with the iPod line. Nanos get vids, but others do not. Touches get capacity bumps (I'm not counting the Classic since it was 160g 2+ years ago!) but Nanos don't. They all have different video screens/capabilities/quality...etc. The Touches now seem to be a GAMING device. Yawn.

I think the current line is nightmare for a consumer...even someone that owned an iPod before. You'll need a giant matrix to figure out what you want.


But on a happy note, I did just order my first iPhone 3GS!

-Eric

[Vorst]

it has been clearly mentioned in the Rumors from different sources. Apple had a production problem with the ipod Touch camera, therefore they skipped it. It was most probably not a marketing decision.
Also I'm waiting already 2 months for my iPhone 3GS. Still difficult to get in Europe. If they would produce a more advanced Video iPod Touch, Apple would have even more problems with deliveries.
I see Apple producing a new Touch with camera in a few months.

[redfirebird08]

I have an iPhone on AT&T and I do regret it. AT&T's service over the last two years has been terrible. It's gotten progressively worse with time as well. There are so many dead zones in the greater Los Angeles area that its gone from wondering where you'll lose your signal to wondering where you'll actually have a signal.

Plus there is the issue of cost. The iPhone starts at $99. But you have to factor in a minimum of $39.99 a month for the lowest minute rate play, as well as $30 for the mandatory data plan, and at least another $5 for 200 SMS/MMS messages. Thats roughly $75 a month BEFORE taxes and fees pile on. You're looking at spending at least $80 a month when all is said and done. For the first year of service, you're looking at $100 for the iPhone plus roughly $960, so overall, $1060 roughly (give or take a few dollars after taxes and fees). Add on another $960 for the second year of the contract.

The iPod touch is a flat $299 (plus sales tax) for the same internal hardware as the iPhone 3G S with no additional fees, save for a $10 upgrade every year thanks to Apple deliberately misusing SOX.

The iPod touch is a much better overall deal. It's a pocket computer that does everything the iPhone does, minus mobile data and the camera. Theres no excuse for the lack of camera, considering those camera modules cost what? $2?

One can argue you'll have a cellphone anyway, so why not just make it an iPhone? Well, the majority of the US population lives in areas served by MetroPCS. $45 a month for unlimited everything. Why pay double to AT&T? Not to mention that the midwest and southern US also have regional carriers that beat the pants off AT&T when it comes to pricing as well. Plus other large carriers like T-Mobile and Boost offer significantly better rate plans than AT&T. With T-Mobile I can buy a phone at full retail and pre-pay monthly and enjoy all of the benefits of contracted service. So why should I buy an iPhone and be stuck with AT&T's expensive and extremely poor service? If I'm going to pay that much for monthly phone service, I'm going to Verizon or Sprint. At least I know I'll get coverage and be able to use my phone with them.

AT&T does suck. My family used to have Cingular, which turned into AT&T. Cingular's coverage was terrible, and they screwed us over when we wanted to upgrade our phones after a while. So when our contract finally ran out we told them to screw off and we went with Sprint. Been using them for a few years now and have been pretty happy with the service.

[rjflyn]

HMMMM the AT&T money must be substantial. Enough to keep the camera out of the Touch.

[mrboult]

Aside from the Touch users who constantly feel they deserve an iPhone for less than the cost of an iPhone and no contract!
I think these updates are pretty sound.

The Nano now has FM Radio, Camera and Speaker! Thats a rockin' ipod!

[polaris20]

Um . . . Apple has had nothing but ideas for the last decade. Apple is really the only one that has had any ideas worth anything lately. And then everyone else lines up to copy.

iPods are slowly being eclipsed by iPhones. The phoneless mp3/mediaplayer is dying. We all need to accept that.

Sure, okay. Because everyone wants to pay $99 a month so they can listen to music and watch movies. :rolleyes:

Until Apple moves the iPhone to a carrier that doesn't suck, which also happens to offer voice and data for $50 or less, I'm not interested.

I don't need an iPhone when the iPod Touch does what I need, since I have a work phone I don't pay for.

[mrklaw]

I think they done it intentionally - think about it, there would be a very little difference between the touch and the iPhone.

if they're making $2.5bn revenue from the app store each year, they need as many devcies out there buying stuff. That includes ipod touches. Ideally you have one common platform, which means camera, GPS, compass in the touch. Ideally microphone in the main unit, not the headphones, but thats ok.

And its not just for taking photos, I know we all have cameras yadda yadda. Its about the other apps you can use with the camera as well. augmented reality with the GPS/compass/camera, barcode scanners, twitpiccing etc.

Not everyone wants to, or can, switch to an iphone. They're either in a contract for a while, happy in their contract, or can't easily switch (eg work supplied phone or want to stay on a particular network)

[hypertc13]

Am I the only one who still loves a Classic?

Love em, love em, love em. I have a Classic for "normal" use, a 1G nano for the gym and a 3G iPhone for ... a phone. I'm thrilled with that lineup.

I like Apple.

ps: I won't be buying anything introduced today. No need.

I also love the classic but i'm sure it will be gone next year once the ipod touch gets up to 120 gb

[jacksparmo]

Are the new Nanos available in the store yet, or just online? Anyone know?

[redfirebird08]

Not everyone wants to, or can, switch to an iphone. They're either in a contract for a while, happy in their contract, or can't easily switch (eg work supplied phone or want to stay on a particular network)

I am happy with my contract and my phone. It's a relatively basic phone compared to all the smart phones out there. The battery lasts a long time on it, which is nice. I kinda like having my iPod separate from my phone because that means I'm not draining the battery on one device while using it for a bunch of different things.

[ipodtouch-user]

Aside from the Touch users who constantly feel they deserve an iPhone for less than the cost of an iPhone and no contract!
I think these updates are pretty sound.

The Nano now has FM Radio, Camera and Speaker! Thats a rockin' ipod!

Ummm, I think it's pretty clear the touch is not an iPhone no matter what -- the iphone has a PHONE. (Not to mention GPS, a huge feature that the itouch doesn't have)

That's fine - but come on, the touch should at least have a built in mic and a camera to make the most of the much touted applications that are available for it.

[Val-kyrie]

So lets say it was technical issues. Everyone goes out buys a new ipod touch then in the spring Apple come out with an ipod touch with a camera. How many people want to bet that Apple does that.

I don't know if it will take until spring . . . but I bet it will be a silent update, too.

I was waiting for a Touch with camera and video capabilities. I have no immediate need for one, so I'll just keep on waiting. Perhaps if the iPhone comes to Verizon I'll consider that instead, but otherwise I'll keep my money for now.

[gr81mgbgt]

Are the new Nanos available in the store yet, or just online? Anyone know?

The stores in my area don't have them until friday or saturday. I am assuming online for now. I wouldn't rush anyways....

[sam10685]

Looks like I'm $400 richer for a while. Next update when I can get GPS and 64GB, and the Touch didn't cross the bar. Figure I'll buy in again next year when either the iPhone grows, or the Touch adds GPS.

Don't bet on that. I'm not surprised the touch didn't get a camera or GPS. it'd take desire away from the iphone SO much... Be happy with it and be quiet. To EVERYONE... It's making me want to barf.

[JohnnyGo]

i honestly think that one day Apple sits down, thinks of tons of ideas, then spreads them out over 15 years. one idea per year. they dont think they will be smart and creative enough to think of ideas when they really need to. they just do it all at once and forget about it. i also think its stupid how they didnt put a video camera on the touch. sure, maybe its because of some problems, but its basically the same as an iphone besides the whole phone and gps part. i find it interesting how they didnt have trouble putting it on the nano and not the touch. and speaking of gps, they really need that in the touches too. Apple, come on.

We all need to remember that Apple is a "for profit" corporation... not a "feel good" institution

Plus we need to remind ourselves that the $199 iPhone 3GS price at ATT is a subsidized price that represents close to $600 for Apple... a way higher unit price than any iPod Touch...

Lastly, one has to think in the long run... either we accept that Apple has to be driven by "market research/analysis" or they will only be a niche player attending the needs of the likes of us...heavy users and eternally unsatisfied tech aficionados

Apple decided to revive the iPod NANO and give it their full strength to compete in the major market, music players, as well as new market, 1-5min videos, which was initially developed with FLIP and now attracts Sanyo, Sony, and others... that is probably a VERY SMART move !

Plus, let's keep in mind that the SMALL form factor rules the decision for most devices, particularly music players, as well as easy to use controls (everyone complains that the iPod shuffle does not have buttons) and durability (the iPod Touch screen is nice for videos but does very little for music and is more prone to cracks)

The recession (unemployment reaching 10%) has also affected disposable income, so Apple is making a decision to target the much broader market for holiday gifts than the self-indulgence of early upgraders (most iPod Touches were sold over the last 12 months and do not need to be upgraded)

Hey... I'm frustrated as everyone else in this Forum... but let's not blame Apple of being too savvy for their own good...

And let's pray that the focus on the iPhone (for me a correct one as I want to have only one device and not a phone/touch combination) is justified by the end of ATT exclusivity period in 2010... and we can all choose the carrier to use our iPhones w/o jailbreaking/unlocking such devices

[Mexbearpig]

I have been reading a couple pages here. And I have read about people saying the glitch a few days ago was for the ipod touch camera. And thats why the iPod touch doesnt have one. But wait. How could apple possibly have the product ready for shipping? They would have to make all new backs for the ipod because they is a hole in the case. And a few days isnt enough time.

[heisetax]

Apple made a big mistake. They should have not put a camera in the nano. If they was not going to put one in the touch.

I agree with you there. But just as those that need to run MS Office on their Macs have come to live as second hand citizens those that choose the iPod Touch will have to get used to being a second hand citizen to those that purchase an iPhone. The iPod Touch will always be lacking in features that it should have. Apple has once again followed Microsoft's lead by making iPod Touch Users a second had citizen. Apple knows that the iPhone leads. They are so paranoid that they will not even let the iPod Touch be all that it can be.

What else can we get to replace the iPhod Touch? Only the iPhone is in its class. Some of us do not want to spend the reported $2,000 to have the extra features. Or maybe Apple is trying to limit the iPod Touch to being a game console. I'm not a game player. I am one that have had a great time using my HP 99, my Apple Newton & several Palm PDAs. I had planned on replacing my last couple of Palms with iPod Touches, but I don't really eant to be a second hand citizen when I purchase an Apple product. Why does Apple have to keep copying Microsoft?

[ibjoshua]

I just took another look at the Nano video camera page (http://www.apple.com/ipodnano/features/video-camera.html). I think it is a bit of an understatement to say that the camera is strangely placed. Why is it behind the clickwheel?
It doesn't matter whether you hold it in portrait or landscape mode there is almost nowhere to put your fingers behind the clickwheel to support it.
The demo video clearly illustrates this.

[Val-kyrie]

I don't think you guys see the significance here. The touch getting a faster processor is the true sign of where this all is going. iPods of the near future will be used much the same way we're using laptops today. To get there they've got to cram more processing power and memory into them... or have them be able to access cloud computing.

Apple hasn't run out of ideas, but are in the middle of a transitional period waiting for all the pieces to fall into place.

I agree about Apple being in a transition here. Another reason to wait for a later, better product unless you REALLY must have one.

[ipodtouch-user]

So you see, Touch users: You complain about Apple drawing the line between the iPhone and Touch, but we Nano users have the same issue with the line between the Touch and Nano. The Nano doesn't even have an open API and App store, although I love the games.


Yes, and I think it's rather funny that Apple has put a video camera in the nano with absolutely no on-board app for editing video.

[gatepc]

I already ordered the 64gb version! yes I would have liked to see a camera No I am not disappointed with the product. I mean 64gb of space is great it has everything I need right now personally I would have prefered gps or an OLED screen over a camera but I guess I will just have to settle for the 3rd gen touch for now.

[iBookG4user]

Nothing too exciting, the new Nano really doesn't offer me anything over my 4th generation. And that camera looks like a magnet for finger prints where it is!

[dommorgan]

in one of the apple press shots where three new ipods are stacked together it looks clearly like the camera has been photoshopped out:

http://images.appleinsider.com/ipodtouch-090909-1.png

looks like a very faint circular ring exactly where the camera would have been... might not be visible on some monitors... either that or I am seeing things.

[Primejimbo]

I have an iPhone on AT&T and I do regret it. AT&T's service over the last two years has been terrible. It's gotten progressively worse with time as well. There are so many dead zones in the greater Los Angeles area that its gone from wondering where you'll lose your signal to wondering where you'll actually have a signal.

Plus there is the issue of cost. The iPhone starts at $99. But you have to factor in a minimum of $39.99 a month for the lowest minute rate play, as well as $30 for the mandatory data plan, and at least another $5 for 200 SMS/MMS messages. Thats roughly $75 a month BEFORE taxes and fees pile on. You're looking at spending at least $80 a month when all is said and done. For the first year of service, you're looking at $100 for the iPhone plus roughly $960, so overall, $1060 roughly (give or take a few dollars after taxes and fees). Add on another $960 for the second year of the contract.

The iPod touch is a flat $299 (plus sales tax) for the same internal hardware as the iPhone 3G S with no additional fees, save for a $10 upgrade every year thanks to Apple deliberately misusing SOX.

The iPod touch is a much better overall deal. It's a pocket computer that does everything the iPhone does, minus mobile data and the camera. Theres no excuse for the lack of camera, considering those camera modules cost what? $2?

One can argue you'll have a cellphone anyway, so why not just make it an iPhone? Well, the majority of the US population lives in areas served by MetroPCS. $45 a month for unlimited everything. Why pay double to AT&T? Not to mention that the midwest and southern US also have regional carriers that beat the pants off AT&T when it comes to pricing as well. Plus other large carriers like T-Mobile and Boost offer significantly better rate plans than AT&T. With T-Mobile I can buy a phone at full retail and pre-pay monthly and enjoy all of the benefits of contracted service. So why should I buy an iPhone and be stuck with AT&T's expensive and extremely poor service? If I'm going to pay that much for monthly phone service, I'm going to Verizon or Sprint. At least I know I'll get coverage and be able to use my phone with them.
I switched from Verizon to at&t and my price tag is the same, so I am use to this monthly plan. The signal is also the same and in some areas I finally have signal. No cell phone provider is going to work 100% coast to coast.. ever. These unlimited everything for $45-50.00 a month are crap. I was working with a guy who sets up Crickets towers and they only have 3 antennas per cell tower and at&t/Verizon and others have about 12 per tower. I talk to a friend who has Cricket and it's so horrible and I'm on a land line. It's funny because is she goes 10 miles west of her house, shes in roaming. I like the fact that I can go anyplace in the USA and pay the same price. I camp too much to have a deal like that also.

[coldmack]

And the shuffle would've been great, had it had buttons.:mad:
Well then I guess that Sandisk Clip+ at 8gb with a screen, clip and buttons so you can use any headphones you want might be what your lookin for. And it has sd card slot like my phone.

[twoodcc]

well i guess the camera on the ipod touch wasn't ready?

[coldmack]

I guess they though the Nano sells more than the Touch(?) so the camera is there because there is where they sell more and they know if they add a camera there it takes way away sales from a device like the Flip.

[sananda]

in one of the apple press shots where three new ipods are stacked together it looks clearly like the camera has been photoshopped out:

http://images.appleinsider.com/ipodtouch-090909-1.png

looks like a very faint circular ring exactly where the camera would have been... might not be visible on some monitors... either that or I am seeing things.

They're not even photographs!

[maconservative]

I personally would like to have seen an FM tuner in more models than just the nano. I could really care less about the video. I would like an "all-purpose" music solution.

[SeaFox]

I was in the market for a new Nano, but I most certainly don't want a camera. I can't carry a camera in my job (automotive). I hope to get ahold of a previous generation Nano, but I bet they did a good job of clearing stock before launching the new gen.
Go to Wal-Mart. My local one still has the clip Shuffles (the ones with buttons). They sell the new dumb ones now, too. But they seem to keep a longer backstock of inventory than other resellers.

[djellison]

What the hell? They're really made it a very muddy, confused, contradictory product line up now.

[Sweetbike40]

for me the biggest disappointment is the shuffle still. the headphones issue. i can't wear the supplied earbuds and no way do i want to buy specific headphones for it and spend more money. it should have been made so you can use any headphones. i guess i have to resort to ebay for the old one.
the least they can do is supply it with the nicer earbuds....the rounder ones with the silicone--in ear, not the crappy flatish ones that fall out and hurt for the 2 minutes they stay on.

[Macman1993]

I honestly have lost a bit of respect for apple after seeing their video showing the "xray" effect for the ipod nano camera. It shows people acting like zombies and it makes it look like you can see their bones. Anyone who knows technology will know they just have the bones printed on their shirts but to average people they will think that the camera can actually show their bones.

I understand they want money but this is just wrong. My respect for apple just went down.

Check out the ad here http://www.apple.com/ipodnano/features/video-camera.html scroll down to the video effects part of the page and click the "xray" video.

[Eric S.]

for me the biggest disappointment is the shuffle still. the headphones issue. i can't wear the supplied earbuds and no way do i want to buy specific headphones for it and spend more money. it should have been made so you can use any headphones. i guess i have to resort to ebay for the old one.

Yup. I'm really glad I bought two of the old ones while supplies lasted.