Apple Still Planning Camera in iPod Touch?

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/11/apple-still-planning-camera-in-ipod-touch/)

http://images.macrumors.com/article/2009/09/11/191911-compare2_500.jpg

Another interesting possibility found in iFixit's (http://www.ifixit.com/) teardown (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/11/third-generation-ipod-touch-teardown-reveals-802-11n-capable-wi-fi-chip/) of the 3rd Generation iPod Touch was finding of an empty space where on the circuit board that could house a camera. The location is consistent with the location of the rumored iPod Touch camera and is distinct from the previous generation iPod Touch design.

Pictured above is the 2nd Generation iPod Touch on the left and the 3rd Generation iPod Touch on the right. The round metal piece seen in the middle of the 2nd Gen iPod Touch board is actually an antenna cable socket which has been moved on the 3rd Gen iPod Touch, which only has a black plastic spacer in that place. According to iFixit (http://www.ifixit.com), an iPod-nano style camera would fit in that location.

The finding is consistent with a report (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/09/10/ipod_touch_with_camera_remains_in_apples_pipeline.html) from AppleInsider which claimed that the iPod Touch with camera was a real product but had been scrapped about a month ago. The rumor site also believes that Apple is still planning on adding camera capabilities to the iPod Touch in the near future.

Article Link: Apple Still Planning Camera in iPod Touch? (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/11/apple-still-planning-camera-in-ipod-touch/)

[Kilamite]

Was the decision to take it out related to the production problems (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/07/its-only-rock-and-roll-banner-and-last-minute-ipod-production-problems/) that were reported..?

It is possible they planned it all a long, wanted a camera in it (why wouldn't they?) but production problems meant it wasn't possible this time round, so instead just took out the camera and used the original back casing from the 2G iPod touch.

As Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/11/3rd-gen-ipod-touch-gets-torn-down-802-11n-and-possible-camera-s/) says - it is possible to mod in a camera. The iPod Nano's camera would fit in there like it was meant to be.

[SimonTheSoundMa]

Double post of the same news arn?

[TwinCities Dan]

Double post of the same news arn?

It's a bot ;)

[ditzy]

Wonder if it was just to prove the rumour sites wrong. I was certainly shocked when it didn't happen.

[puffnstuff]

seeing how it would have gotten the nano camera I think they changed there mind at the last minute.

[arn]

Double post of the same news arn?

this deserved it's own post. and a little more info. :)

arn

[i3iz]

makes sense. I saw the black corner and thought, a camera! then i couldnt find a description that stated there was one.

I think they yanked it at the last minute, replaced it with a plastic piece.

my bet is they will release the camera in 30 days and offer an upgrade path for current gen owners.

[ashimashi]

makes sense. I saw the black corner and thought, a camera! then i couldnt find a description that stated there was one.

I think they yanked it at the last minute, replaced it with a plastic piece.

my bet is they will release the camera in 30 days and offer an upgrade path for current gen owners.

not gonna happen :D

[iBookG4user]

I highly doubt that they will release a new iPod Touch with a camera in the immediate future. I would think that would have to wait until the next rev, otherwise they'll have a mob of early adopters with pitchforks :p

[Chundles]

makes sense. I saw the black corner and thought, a camera! then i couldnt find a description that stated there was one.

I think they yanked it at the last minute, replaced it with a plastic piece.


What? I detect sarcasm...

[puffnstuff]

I highly doubt that they will release a new iPod Touch with a camera in the immediate future. I would think that would have to wait until the next rev, otherwise they'll have a mob of early adopters with pitchforks :p

They do this all the time that's why it's good NOT to be an early adopter

A month is highly unlikely January or May if anything.

[Sky Blue]

It'll be out the day after Christmas Day.

[iVoid]

not gonna happen :D

Yeah, if it was a production issue, they might release a Touch with camera early next year. I think the iPod lineup is pretty much set for xmas now.

If it was a case of them wanting to differentiate the products, then it'll be a year at least before they put the camera in the Touch.

[freiheit]

Well when they do add a camera (with the touch-to-focus technology) to the iPod Touch, then they might sell one to me. Until then, it's just not convincing enough for me.

[The Samurai]

Boy is there going to be a lot of angry people if they plan to launch a camera version this year. Would be sensible to launch it in their next yearly revision.

[Beric]

It'll be out the day after Christmas Day.

I'd say at Macworld, but Apple isn't going anymore.

No way they'd release it before Christmas, though.

[mattwolfmatt]

Maybe for $20, they'll sell a DIY ipod touch camera kit. The camera, a putty knife, some superglue and a rosary.

[Beric]

Maybe for $20, they'll sell a DIY ipod touch camera kit. The camera, a putty knife, some superglue and a rosary.

No way. Apple doesn't do that kind of stuff.

[j_appel]

Not sure if they would release it before next September, but there is a chance. The 32GB first generation iPod touch was released in February. Just five months after the iPod touch was introduced.

[nofear1az]

maybe they left it out so it'll blend better :-)

I don't know why they left it out and I just don't believe the story about technical issues is the reasoning. They know how to put cameras in their devices, they did it with the iPhone and they just did it with the Nano which is half the size of a Touch and you're telling me they couldn't figure out a technicality problem to put it in a Touch? Seriously, how could anyone believe that. I truly, truly believe, it was intentionally left out probably just like Jobs said to bring the costs down as low as possible. Besides, they need to have a feature to add for the 4th Gen next year. hehe

[Fx203]

The ipod touch probably had problems with the camera so apple decided not to do it. Seeing as they announced that every ipod is "available today" at the event on the 9th. I think that apple wanted people to buy for the holidays what they released on the 9th while they fix the issue with the camera on the touch and mass produce enough to launch the same day its announced (probably sometime early next year, possibly when they announce there tablet).

[mattwolfmatt]

No way. Apple doesn't do that kind of stuff.

Really? Hmm . . . I thought for sure they do.

PS both this post and my previous one had a HEAVY dose of sarcasm.

[MacFly123]

I knew this was the case. I just wasn't sure how Apple could honestly have "production problems" with a stupid camera that they already have experience with in the iPhone. I figured it came down to Steve's obsession with thinness.

I'll bet anything they will refresh the Touch with a camera in January after the holidays!

[Beric]

Really? Hmm . . . I thought for sure they do.

PS both this post and my previous one had a HEAVY dose of sarcasm.

There is no sarcasm on the internet.

[byulasfjazz]

I dont think apple is ready for that yet... If the Ipod has a camera,... then who needs the Iphone? Besides service on the road ... They would be the same device...

[wizard]

Boy is there going to be a lot of angry people if they plan to launch a camera version this year. Would be sensible to launch it in their next yearly revision.

Each buyer is free to make the decision to buy the current Touch and thus have no right to complain about what is in future models. If Apple can pull it off the thing to do would be to introduce the camera model a week or two before Thanksgiving. That would certainly stimulate the holiday sales. That is two and a half months from now.

I would be very interested to know exactly what the defect was. Considering that the current nano camera only does video I wonder if high resolution pic quality was crappy. They may be expecting to much from such a tiny device.



Dave

[FSMBP]

I dont think apple is ready for that yet... If the Ipod has a camera,... then who needs the Iphone? Besides service on the road ... They would be the same device...

Yes, I am going to take my iPod touch and make calls when I head up to New Jersey this weekend. Hope I don't get lost.

An iPod having a cellphone and NOT having one is not a small difference.

People in cellphone markets aren't saying "Well since the iPod Touch has a camera, I will just get a crappy Nokia and an iPod Touch. And I will definitely ALWAYS carry both devices and make sure both are charged and ready. That won't be annoying at all, keeping track of two separate devices"

iPhone is king is because it's the utlimate all in one cellphone. Nothing else. When my contract is up, I will be getting m first iPhone. If I want a wifi media player, I'll get an iPod Touch.

[Savs2323]

is the camera slot also in the new 199$ version

[wizard]

I dont think apple is ready for that yet... If the Ipod has a camera,... then who needs the Iphone? Besides service on the road ... They would be the same device...

The little bit of extra tech in the iPhone makes a huge difference in how the devices are used. A camera placed in the Touch doesn't even come close to making it an iPhone. That cell capability is huge. On top of that there are significant differences in battery life.

What would be funny though is if the defect they found was later traced down to somebodies finger on front of the lens.



Dave

[ryanw]

Maybe they had them already in production, but there was a last minute design problem (which was rumored) so they had to pull it. I can't imagine Apple INTENTIONALLY giving a video/picture camera to the iPod Nano, and not the iPod Touch. This to me seems like a 'time to market / production issue' that they are covering up and plan to fix for the next version.

[Acorn]

I highly doubt that they will release a new iPod Touch with a camera in the immediate future. I would think that would have to wait until the next rev, otherwise they'll have a mob of early adopters with pitchforks :p

they did it with the 13 inch aluminum mac -> to 13 inch "mac pro"

[DakotaGuy]

I think they planned it, but realized that it's a smarter business move to wait on the camera. They will sell plenty of Touches with the new lower prices and improved capacity and then when a camera comes those people will want to upgrade again.

[Scott90]

Each buyer is free to make the decision to buy the current Touch and thus have no right to complain about what is in future models.

But if Apple plays this trick too often, people aren't going to buy anymore of their products, because they think they will be screwed again. I am planning on buying the new touch, and I know I don't have the right to complain, but sure as hell I will if they introduce an iPod touch with camera anytime soon. Apple wants to keep their customers, and a bunch of complaining customers ain't helping...

And I'm only talking about 'soon', which to me is before February.

[The Samurai]

If Apple can pull it off the thing to do would be to introduce the camera model a week or two before Thanksgiving. That would certainly stimulate the holiday sales.


From a business POV - it simply doesn't make sense introducing one this quickly. Not a chance.

[zenoran]

technically jobs wasn't lying he said he wanted to drive the cost down... well, fixing production and design problems costs a lot of money.. there would be no way they could allocate the expense and lower the cost of the device...

design flaws are costly to fix especially when under the gun for a release deadline!

the difference is, a company like microsoft would just release the buggy device and just pray they could fix it with software updates... either that or it could be the next xbox! hehe .. ok im done

[MarkCooz]

If apple seriously is coming out with a future update for the iPod touch with camera, I'll just wait for that one!

Or.... I'm going to get the iPhone 3G S

I'm waiting til' next year until i can actually upgrade to a iPhone 3g s.
It's either that or the sony ericsson w905 with the 8 MP camera. but iPhone still wins on my mind.

[A Macbook Pro]

Guys, this is what you don't understand. When you buy, your buying what's on offer at the time because you want whats on offer. If they come out with a camera tomorrow, then you can't complain, because you obviously didn't want a camera and was happy with what they were selling at the time. I'm getting an iPod Touch 3G, I'll be happy with it, and when an iPod Touch with a camera comes out, then I'll buy it. If you can't afford upgrading, wait until the iPod Touch has all the features you want.

[twoodcc]

yeah, i really think they will add the camera eventually

[TitoC]

There is no sarcasm on the internet.

I KNEW Sarcasm once. We went way back. And you sir, are NO Sarcasm!

[benlee]

I highly doubt they will add a camera before Feb/March of next year.
I think there were probably a combination of issues that made them not go with a camera.

Although the quality of the camera in the nano is decent, I think a item like the touch should have the ability to take decent still photos. I think if it was just production problems then Apple would have just delayed shipment, if they really wanted to add it.

People would have complained how crappy the camera was if it was the quality of the nano's on the iPod Touch.

Sadly, I'm not really in the market for an iPod anymore because I have an iPhone. Although I must admit, the new Nanos look really good.

[scotty96LSC]

Maybe for $20, they'll sell a DIY ipod touch camera kit. The camera, a putty knife, some superglue and a rosary.
Add the holy water and you got it. Funny stuff.

[greg555]

I highly doubt they will add a camera before Feb/March of next year.
I think there were probably a combination of issues that made them not go with a camera.

Although the quality of the camera in the nano is decent, I think a item like the touch should have the ability to take decent still photos. I think if it was just production problems then Apple would have just delayed shipment, if they really wanted to add it.



I agree on your dates.

I would guess they wanted to put a better camera in the touch than the nano (i.e. stills) and they couldn't get one small enough that met Steve's requirements.

Greg

[leomac08]

i think we will see a camera,...... no doubt about it..... steve jobs is a big liar.

[iBookG4user]

they did it with the 13 inch aluminum mac -> to 13 inch "mac pro"

The aluminum MacBook had a product life of 8 months though. If they're talking about the immediate future, that would mean that the current 3rd gen iPod Touch had a product life of much less than that.

[wizard]

But if Apple plays this trick too often, people aren't going to buy anymore of their products, because they think they will be screwed again.

I'm really hoping you reconsider what you have written above because it places you in a marginal category. I don't often like being that blunt but my god are you so ignorant that you think it is reasonable to call this a trick? That really is a question I hope you will answer in this forum.

Every indication publically available and confirmed with the most recent pictures of the new Touches internals, indicates this was a last minute decision. The pics support the idea that production problems resulted in the camera being pulled after post production testing indicated problems.

Further this so called trick could easily have sunk lesser companies as it invalidates a great deal of engineering effort, marketing development and other support costs. This little problem will have likely cost Apple a big chunk of change.


I am planning on buying the new touch, and I know I don't have the right to complain, but sure as hell I will if they introduce an iPod touch with camera anytime soon.

Go ahead but don't expect any support what so ever from most of the forum members here. The evidence is as plain as day and if you can't deal with it that is totally your problem. If you can't see the future with respect to a camera in the Touch then take off your blinders.

Apple wants to keep their customers, and a bunch of complaining customers ain't helping...

Then ****! Your postings are complete garbage. For one you haven't even purchased the current model yet but you are complaining up front about one coming down the road with a camera in it. Frankly Apple doesn't need "customers" like you that are petty and immature. So go to MS and buy a Zune and see how well that is supported.


And I'm only talking about 'soon', which to me is before February.

Please go pound salt for a bit and clear your mind. It is obvious at this point the Touch was meant to have a camera. The best thing Apple can do is to get that feature into a production model as soon as possible. Ideally within a couple of months. The problem now is that people will be expecting that camera and a lot of sales will go on hold.

I'm not trying to sell the idea that one should wait for a camera built into the Touch here just that some will. Rather what I'm getting at is that you make a decision to buy based on info available at the time. It is clear now that iPhone had a camera destined for it's internals so buy smart and don't complain.


Dave

[wizard]

The aluminum MacBook had a product life of 8 months though. If they're talking about the immediate future, that would mean that the current 3rd gen iPod Touch had a product life of much less than that.

I could see one or more of the current Touches remaining on sale for a long while. The reality is many of Apples customers really don't care one way or the other. If it can be sold a few bucks cheaper people will go for it.

Well except for those that like to complain. I can see people now complaining about how confused they are with Apples product line up if that where to happen.


Dave

[The Samurai]

The problem now is that people will be expecting that camera and a lot of sales will go on hold.


Only the hardcore 'geeks' on such forum sites will hold back in buying from - the average joe wouldn't have a scooby when and if the touch is going to get the camera in the future.

[Beric]

Only the hardcore 'geeks' on such forum sites will hold back in buying from - the average joe wouldn't have a scooby when and if the touch is going to get the camera in the future.

95% of people don't even get that Apple updates iPods every September.

[sam10685]

Hopefully the geeks of the world will finally calm down. :rolleyes:

[RazHyena]

I think Apple is getting a little too predictable with this sort of thing. Yeah, people are going to be burned when the Touch is released with a camera later on this year....or next year, whatever.

Like I said before, I really think Apple just want's to sell more of their Nanos. Expect a LOT of iPod Touch backed-up backstock from retailers this year. :D

[MacLover4491]

I hope they come out an ipod touch with the camera next month. haha that would be fun. =)

Guys, this is what you don't understand. When you buy, your buying what's on offer at the time because you want whats on offer. If they come out with a camera tomorrow, then you can't complain, because you obviously didn't want a camera and was happy with what they were selling at the time. I'm getting an iPod Touch 3G, I'll be happy with it, and when an iPod Touch with a camera comes out, then I'll buy it. If you can't afford upgrading, wait until the iPod Touch has all the features you want.

[ob81]

Well, Apple up to their normal crappy ways. They will get tons of people to upgrade o this version, then they will add a camera, and get people to upgrade to that version. They really changed as of recent.

[efp722]

maybe they left it out so it'll blend better :-)

I don't know why they left it out and I just don't believe the story about technical issues is the reasoning. They know how to put cameras in their devices, they did it with the iPhone and they just did it with the Nano which is half the size of a Touch and you're telling me they couldn't figure out a technicality problem to put it in a Touch? Seriously, how could anyone believe that. I truly, truly believe, it was intentionally left out probably just like Jobs said to bring the costs down as low as possible. Besides, they need to have a feature to add for the 4th Gen next year. hehe

i was under the impression it was more of a technical issue with the cameras themselves and not apple. bad batch of cameras?

[u2mr2os2]

I think they were thinking of putting one in, but were not sure what Microsoft was going to do with the Zune HD. They may have purposefully leaked the images of an iPod touch with camera to make MS think that's where they were going. MS reacts with a price attack, so Apple leaves the camera out to be able to counter on price since they don't need to compete with a camera the Zune doesn't have.

[DrFrankTM]

I would guess they wanted to put a better camera in the touch than the nano (i.e. stills) and they couldn't get one small enough that met Steve's requirements.
Greg

I agree. The teardown pointed out that the space for the camera in the touch was not big enough to fit the camera used for the iPhone. So I guess we'll have to wait a bit longer. The question I have is: Will the iPhone always have a better camera because of that (just like the touch always has twice as much flash memory)?

[huntercr]

This was not be accident or by any "problem" with the camera. Apple obviously tested the marketability of the touch and found it was going to be tapping into iPhone sales. Remember the entire point of the ipod touch from Apple's point of view is to capture people who primarily want a video and audio device. If you start adding in toooo many iPhone features, then peoplel might say... hmmm.. you know, my crappy razr works just fine for calls... and it's paid for.... why start a new contract... I'll just buy a touch.

Apple doesn't want that conversation to happen. :)

In reality I think the touch should differentiate itself as much as possible anyway... it should be good at what it does and not try to be everything.
I was really hoping for a higher density screen ( 640x400ish ) and an hdmi 720p video output jack in this version, but I think Apple will end up putting those type of features in the iPad/iBook soon to arrive ( keeping fingers crossed )

[Eric5h5]

I'd like to know why people are so keen on a camera in the touch, when, if they did get one, they'd just complain about the quality of it anyway.

--Eric

[griz]

If it's going to get the craptastic video only vga camera that the nano has, I say no thanks. That's a sorry excuse for a camera if it were in the touch. The nano, sure, but the touch is a serious platform and that camera has no business in it. Besides, people with a touch want to be able to take pics too. Not just crappy video. At least make it 720x480 so I can fit it to my wide screen. Who wants 4:3 video anymore?

[griz]

I'd like to know why people are so keen on a camera in the touch, when, if they did get one, they'd just complain about the quality of it anyway.

--Eric

Not if they match the iPhone quality. But if they give us the nano camera, that's just sad. Make it 720p. We will all be very happy. Well, touch users. iPhone users will then complain.

[6daniels]

seeing how it would have gotten the nano camera I think they changed there mind at the last minute.

I completely agree with you why on earth would the ipod nano get camera but the ipod touch wouldn't even though when the ipod touch is the hottest gaming device on the market. :eek:

[Xibalba]

Maybe for $20, they'll sell a DIY ipod touch camera kit. The camera, a putty knife, some superglue and a rosary.

Ha that's great. Would love to see DIY label on an Apple kit....

[DUSTmurph]

95% of people don't even get that Apple updates iPods every September.

True dat. I know somebody who bought a touch on tuesday, the day before the obvious updates for the iPods.

[ruku]

i think we will see a camera,...... no doubt about it..... steve jobs is a big liar.

yep, he will eat those words and we will all move on. just once i wish someone would put together a clip of all of his contradictive claims to which he did a 180 degrees turn on later and ask him directly to do us the favor of saying nothing rarther than telling us what (he thinks) we want or what (to apples advantage) suits us.

[mr.steevo]

Maybe for $20, they'll sell a DIY ipod touch camera kit. The camera, a putty knife, some superglue and a rosary.

Absolutely not!

Steve is a Buddist.

s.

[JGowan]

I don't believe for a second that Apple pulled the plug on the iPod Touch getting a camera on 09/09/09.

Several reasons:

1) Camera in the Nano only sends the message clearly this is the video iPod.

2) iPod Touch sans video is the Gaming iPod.

3) They needed to get the iPod Touch to $199. A camera chip would cut into their profit margins too much. Better to sell 5-10 Million of these new Touches and THEN, put in the video camera.

4) A video Touch would cannibalize sales of the Nano. It makes a lot more sense to get someone to buy a $149/$179 Nano and then 4-6 months from now, get them to get the video Touch for another $199/$299... I think more then enough people will do it to get to watch home videos on a bigger screen than the 2.2" that the Nano offers.

[puckhead193]

i still think apple should have offered it as an option or maybe just the 64 gb verison... I know i'm debating between the 32/64 i would swing more towards the 64 b/c it has a camera to use some of the apps.
o well bring on the iphone/verizon rumors..i can hope can't i :p

[madmax_2069]

I will just hold off until Apple does make a IPT with a camera.

[roboleg]

Yeah this could, in all possibility, be something in the near future, or like 6 months time. Maybe iPod touch 3.5G?
iPod classic 5.5G? Yeah remember it? Fo sho.

[terraphantm]

I could see apple eventually launching a camera version and selling it side-by-side the normal version with a $50-$100 increase in price at each size. Then they'd phase out the non-camera version and drop the price. Kind of like what they did with the iPod 4G and iPod Photo.

I definitely think the camera was planned initially; that prototype from a while back looked pretty legit.

[andyplace]

The internals of the released iPod touch 3g (or fall 2009 model):

http://s1.guide-images.ifixit.com/igi/yXAoKgDaAg4HJ4bK.large

Here's picture of the prototype spotted a month ago. You can see clearly that there is a little camera module, but there is a plastic piece on the final model.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3509/3821327688_026f1504e5_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/covinoandrich/3821327688/sizes/o/in/photostream/) http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2656/3821580690_946dc62a7f.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/covinoandrich/3821580690/in/photostream/)

Those photos weren't fake.

I believe the cameras did have technical issues and had to be removed, and that they will reappear within 6 months in an updated iPod touch.

[Bonte]

The iPod Nano's camera would fit in there like it was meant to be.

So no photo's then, only video? That would suck more than the current model, the Touch needs a still camera with geo-tagging, not a video-only Flip play thingy.

[Cinematographer]

I'd like to know why people are so keen on a camera in the touch, when, if they did get one, they'd just complain about the quality of it anyway.

--Eric

Very true.

Complaining has become peoples favourite pastime anyway.

[ezekielrage_99]

IMHO I would rather have no camera than a half baked implement like with the new Nanos...

I saw the new Nanos at the Apple shop in Sydney I can say I was far from impressed, the idea of a camera is good the quality was mediocre at best.

And as I've said before if you're basing the entire buy or not to buy solely on if it has a camera or not then the touch isn't for you.

[JGowan]

I'd like to know why people are so keen on a camera in the touch, when, if they did get one, they'd just complain about the quality of it anyway.
Very true.

Complaining has become peoples favourite pastime anyway.Oh... a Complaint about the complainers,... delicious. ;)

[leRiCl]

People in cellphone markets aren't saying "Well since the iPod Touch has a camera, I will just get a crappy Nokia and an iPod Touch. And I will definitely ALWAYS carry both devices and make sure both are charged and ready. That won't be annoying at all, keeping track of two separate devices"

That's exactly what I do, but replace "Nokia" with Sony Ericsson and "crappy" with mediocre.

For me, it's okay if my mp3 player/game machine run out of battery in the middle of the day, but its not for a mobile phone.

That's why I keep them separate, at least until iphones batteries improve a great deal in longevity.

IMO its safer to keep the separate. I've had my phone stolen when I was in China. Lucky my ipod was safe so I still had my contact numbers... (Yes, I do back up my contacts once a year or so but I didn't bring the computer along on the trip.)

[troller]

this whole apple rip off strategy is just a shame

[cferreira]

Looking the iFixIt I see space on both sides. Isn't?

Back side... the Broadcom chip was moved to right, leaving an empty space for a rear camera.

And at the front side, is even more clear with these holes shaped for the lowres Nano 5G cam.

For me this proves the theory (based on rumors) about iPod and iPhone 4th generation coming with a frontal webcam.

Perhaps Apple next year will give us a surprise?

[troller]

Perhaps Apple next year will give us a surprise?

Surprise??? Wake up....if apple was a restaurant and you would like to order a pizza with cheese, onion, tomatoes and ham, they would bring you 1 pizza with cheese, one with onion, one with, tomatoes and one with ham....after that they would say: 50Bucks please

that's apple

[cferreira]

Surprise??? Wake up....if apple was a restaurant and you would like to order a pizza with cheese, onion, tomatoes and ham, they would bring you 1 pizza with cheese, one with onion, one with, tomatoes and one with ham....after that they would say: 50Bucks please

that's apple

Frustrated with Apple? Do you prefer Windows/PC?

[swishyfresh]

I was going to treat myself to an ipod touch this christmas, and with the prior rumors of a camera coming up I thought perfect!!!... thank god I waited and didn't get one over the summer.

But now, I'm horribly dissapointed because I won't buy one without the video camera. I'll always be thinking... if I'd waited 6 months or however long, I would of had a video camera in this.

Shame. For the first time as an apple consumer, I'm truly disappointed.

They'll redem themselves if they announce before xmas that a new camera added version will be released on a specific date come 2010. Then I'll ask santa clause for vouchers from the apple store and I'll happily wait.

If not, I'm getting a Zune... damn it.

[troller]

Frustrated with Apple? Do you prefer Windows/PC?
No, I am not frustrated with apple products but the way they how they sell them and the way how they add new "features".

[kirreip]

I don't get it. Please someone explain it to me. Why would you ever want a camera on an iPod? Every cell phone has one of those crappy cameras you never ever wanna use because the quality is so bad. Do yourself a favour and get a digital SLR camera to take pics or a camcorder make a movie. If you want to take a pic on a party use your cell phone.

[swingerofbirch]

I don't get it. Please someone explain it to me. Why would you ever want a camera on an iPod? Every cell phone has one of those crappy cameras you never ever wanna use because the quality is so bad. Do yourself a favour and get a digital SLR camera to take pics or a camcorder make a movie. If you want to take a pic on a party use your cell phone.

it's more that the camera can add interesting functionality to a lot of app store applications, especially those augmented reality ones coming out

i agree though about cell phone cameras though in general, i haven't used the iphones, but my lg dare's camera is relatively good for a cell phone camera, but it is almost useless because of having no image stabilization and me having shaky hands, and it in particular has this horrible problem where it doesn't actually take the picture until a few seconds after you let go of the button and it makes the snapshot sound, still it's good in a pinch

[SactoGuy18]

I'd put my money that Apple will have the camera-equipped 3G iPod touch arriving in early 2010 on the 32 and 64 GB models. Apple may offer an upgrade option for 3G iPod touch users that will allow people who bought the 3G iPod touch at the Apple Store to freely transfer all settings and files on the current 3G iPod touch models to the camera-equipped 3G iPod touch models.

[Thex1138]

It was a similar charge with iPhone 1 when they doubled the memory shortly after release...
The camera device was simply too big this time round... Engineers...are miracle workers!

[joueboy]

Come on near future! Of course it's gonna happen! You'll see a camera on the next version of iPod touch that's for sure. People Apple didn't mentioned production related problem for not having the camera. It's their decision not to put a camera it's a marketing strategy, giving you a reason to upgrade next time. It's clear from the words of SJ it's being promoted as a portable gaming device for now. Keep your older iPod Touch unless you're a sucker and save your money for the next update. If you're crazy and dying to have a camera for all in one device get an iPhone. You hate AT&T like I do, get those portable HD video camera for less than $200, Youtubers will thank you for your clear videos.

[Tylerrr]

This is rather interesting. I was planning on buying an iPod touch today, but now I may have to hold off, as the camera was one of the most fascinating rumors around. I was planning on just dealing with it, though now I'm not so sure.

From pure speculation, I would have to surmise that there are a few possible courses of action for apple here.

I don't believe that there's a set duration that the new touches will be in production before the camera model is introduced. There wouldn't be much to worry about between the nano and touch, as the cheap $199 touch would likely not come with a camera. That means that consumers would have to choose between a $149 nano with video capabilities, or a $299 touch with video capabilities. Both models would be widely purchased due to the gap in pricing.

Now, I can certainly understand that the iPod touch last-minute camera flaws may be valid rumors. I can also understand why Apple would keep their intended release date. But here's the thing, there's virtually no question that Apple intended to have a camera in the device, and even if the cameras were pulled last-minute, the space remains. I'm led to believe that regardless of the fact that several consumers have purchased iPod touches already, and several more will, that Apple will introduce cameras whenever they're fit to be released. I'm also surmising that Apple will offer a service to conveniently put the cameras into existing models, for a bit of a fee. I'm absolutely positive Apple has contemplated the same things you all have ... if consumers buy now, and the camera is quickly introduced, there will be a massive uproar of angry patrons. There has to be a logical fix to that problem, and that is simply offering the camera to those who couldn't wait for it.

Of course, this is all just speculation. I was planning on buying the 64GB touch today, though now I think I'll wait for the camera, as the app functionality with the cameras would be pristine.

Which brings me to a new point, everyone keeps addressing the fact that the iPod touch is becoming too close to the iPhone, and this will hurt iPhone sales. The iPod touch does not offer 3G connectivity, which is arguably the most convenient feature on the iPhone. For this reason, Apple really doesn't need to worry about the iPhone sales plummeting.

Here's something that it seems no one has considered:

By introducing cameras to the iPod touch line, just how much do you think Apple will make from iTunes Store app purchases? This would open up the entire world of photography apps to iPod touch users. The potential for profiting continually from the number of these is absolute.

So, I would have to say that it's in Apple's best interests to offer a camera in the near future, and when I say "near future," I mean whenever it's ready.

At least, we can all hope, right?

*Edit*

One more thought, don't forget the iPhone contract with AT&T is almost expired. I don't think Apple wants a bunch of "Aw, it's cool that the iPhone is on my carrier now, but I already have an iPod touch ... " responses, so maybe they're holding off until both can be released at the same time-or-so, so that the iPhone gets the main attention. Who knows? There are so many variables ...

[dambrosir]

Has anybody (i.e. developer) who bought the new iPod touch taken a look at the 3.1 OS. To see if that ability to take pictures or video exists.

[Tylerrr]

Has anybody (i.e. developer) who bought the new iPod touch taken a look at the 3.1 OS. To see if that ability to take pictures or video exists.

my best bet is "yes," because it's iPhone OS.

[jayducharme]

4) A video Touch would cannibalize sales of the Nano. It makes a lot more sense to get someone to buy a $149/$179 Nano and then 4-6 months from now, get them to get the video Touch for another $199/$299...

This is a good point. The price difference between the two products is so minimal ($20) that the Touch might easily outstrip the nano in sales (unless all you really wanted was a tiny iPod).

Outside of Jobs telling Pogue that he wanted to control the cost of the Touch, I don't buy his reasoning that the Touch is being marketed as a gaming device. With all of the augmented reality apps beginning to appear in the App Store, the Touch will be left out of that gaming revolution unless it gets a camera. There's something else going on....

[TripHop]

I'll Wait 4 The Camera In 64GB Touch. Was going to order it as is but this rumor seems 2 real 4 me to blow even the MacConnection's bargain price of $380 which is $60 less than buying it in an Apple store where I am.

If the camera model is only months away, I'd rather vote against the new Jumbo RAM Touch by not buying it yet. I have the 32GB 2G Touch. Want 64GB. But I believe this rumor so I'm going to tough it out until Apple fixes the technical problem and then quietly adds the camera when fewer are looking like in late January 2010.

Late January's when they doubled the maximum RAM size to 32GB on the 1G Touch in 2008 much to a lot of people's surprise and with zero fanfaire. It was a very big deal, but that close after the holiday shopping season any kind of noise would have upset a lot more holiday buyers than it did with a "silent" press release only tactic.

[KiamLaLuno]

I don't see any reason for adding a camera to the iPod Nano, and not to the iPod Touch.
There are some applications that would use the camera in a iPod Touch in the same way they already use it on an iPhone (there is an application that calculate the distance of an object using the camera); the camera in the iPod Nano can be used only with the built applications the iPod comes with.

I would not be surprised, anyway, if an iPod Touch with camera would never come out.

[Eidorian]

My impulse to get a Nano IMMEDIATELY has died down. I'll get one refurbished now. I don't see a reason to have left the camera off of the Touch other than to milk a few dollars.

Don't buy it if it doesn't have what you want. Why suffer with the current model if you want a camera on your Touch?

[Tylerrr]

This is a good point. The price difference between the two products is so minimal ($20) that the Touch might easily outstrip the nano in sales (unless all you really wanted was a tiny iPod).

Outside of Jobs telling Pogue that he wanted to control the cost of the Touch, I don't buy his reasoning that the Touch is being marketed as a gaming device. With all of the augmented reality apps beginning to appear in the App Store, the Touch will be left out of that gaming revolution unless it gets a camera. There's something else going on....

Well, it's like I mentioned in my post, I doubt that the 8GB touch would have a camera because it's still running the old processor and (from what I understand) all of its other older hardware.

That would put the price gap at $150 dollars, making the touch with a camera twice as expensive as the nano with a camera.

Much more practical, I think.

[Chimpy]

They're going to develop a better camera for the Touch and that'll be the next upgrade path for Touch owners.

[TripHop]

I dont think apple is ready for that yet... If the Ipod has a camera,... then who needs the Iphone? Besides service on the road ... They would be the same device...I do. They are nothing alike. They are complementary devices that share the same OS. You must be very unfamiliar with the tech to think otherwise.

1. iPhone has Internet access everywhere there's cell service.
2. iPhone has GPS & Digital Compass for location & navigation apps.
3. iPhone has short battery life to keep it on the cell net.
4. iPhone has a $79 monthly cell net access charge - minimum.
5. iTouch has long battery life so playing music, video, games & apps doesn't kill it.
6. iTouch has Wi-Fi Internet access with no monthly charges.
7. iTouch has room in the non-phone section for more RAM to store a lot more music, video, games & apps.

I use the Touch for everything I don't need cell net access for so my iPhone's battery isn't dead by noon. Without a Touch to complement my iPhone I would be constantly making compromises about how I would only use my iPhone. Really dedicated mobile Mac people have and use both in quite complementary ways.
Yes, I am going to take my iPod touch and make calls when I head up to New Jersey this weekend. Hope I don't get lost.

An iPod having a cellphone and NOT having one is not a small difference.

People in cellphone markets aren't saying "Well since the iPod Touch has a camera, I will just get a crappy Nokia and an iPod Touch. And I will definitely ALWAYS carry both devices and make sure both are charged and ready. That won't be annoying at all, keeping track of two separate devices"

iPhone is king is because it's the utlimate all in one cellphone. Nothing else. When my contract is up, I will be getting m first iPhone. If I want a wifi media player, I'll get an iPod Touch.

The little bit of extra tech in the iPhone makes a huge difference in how the devices are used. A camera placed in the Touch doesn't even come close to making it an iPhone. That cell capability is huge. On top of that there are significant differences in battery life.

What would be funny though is if the defect they found was later traced down to somebodies finger on front of the lens.



Dave

[pika2000]

There's a big gap on the current Touch lineup. 8GB, and then 32GB? Where's 16GB?

October event, the true 3G Touch with camera, 16GB for $249, 32GB for $349, filling the gaps in the current lineup without discontinuing anything. ;) Who's with me? :D

[gnasher729]

Maybe they had them already in production, but there was a last minute design problem (which was rumored) so they had to pull it. I can't imagine Apple INTENTIONALLY giving a video/picture camera to the iPod Nano, and not the iPod Touch. This to me seems like a 'time to market / production issue' that they are covering up and plan to fix for the next version.

There is no "last minute design problem". There is possibly a "we tried for months but there is just no bloody way to fit that camera in" problem.

[Plutonius]

seeing how it would have gotten the nano camera I think they changed there mind at the last minute.

It takes awhile to change the case, etc. There were no production problems and they were not going to put a camera in the iPod Touch.

The inside circuitry was designed awhile ago and it didn't cost them anything to leave the space there.

[Plutonius]

There's a big gap on the current Touch lineup. 8GB, and then 32GB? Where's 16GB?

October event, the true 3G Touch with camera, 16GB for $249, 32GB for $349, filling the gaps in the current lineup without discontinuing anything. ;) Who's with me? :D

Never going to happen. The space is just big enough for the nano video camera but is not big enough for the iPhone camera. Apple does not want to hurt their iPhone sales and you will never see a phoneless iPhone.

[wizard]

I was going to treat myself to an ipod touch this christmas, and with the prior rumors of a camera coming up I thought perfect!!!... thank god I waited and didn't get one over the summer.

So you waited more than a half a year for something based on a rumor? What was the point in that?


But now, I'm horribly dissapointed because I won't buy one without the video camera. I'll always be thinking... if I'd waited 6 months or however long, I would of had a video camera in this.

Oh you poor boy! I'm truly saddened to see you in turmoil over this, what can be done to lighten your burden? How about growing up.

Your post makes about as much sense as me complaining about Apple increasing the size of the flash memory in The iPhone or the amount of RAM there. It is an absolute given that Apple will improve the hardware over time, it is not something to complain about rather you should be happy. How else would we end up with a palmable computer that is many times faster than our old Mac Pluses.



Shame. For the first time as an apple consumer, I'm truly disappointed.

the great shame here is getting worked up over nothing.


They'll redem themselves if they announce before xmas that a new camera added version will be released on a specific date come 2010. Then I'll ask santa clause for vouchers from the apple store and I'll happily wait.

Now I understand, we are dealing with a spoiled brat here. How about this go out and earn your own money for this iPod you think is coming.


If not, I'm getting a Zune... damn it.

Poor boy what will you do if they aren't on the market next year?


Dave

[wizard]

it's more that the camera can add interesting functionality to a lot of app store applications, especially those augmented reality ones coming out

All of which would be useless if the iPod arrived without GPS and camera. Admittedly there are interesting apps for iPhone that could leverage a Touch camera but at this point it appears that the camera would have been of questionable quality as a source for this software.

This is one of those situations where being a fly on the wall would have been nice. That so we could know exactly why the camera got rejected. Right now I have to believe that still picture quality was awful. That simply from looking at the size of the camera module.


i agree though about cell phone cameras though in general, i haven't used the iphones, but my lg dare's camera is relatively good for a cell phone camera, but it is almost useless because of having no image stabilization and me having shaky hands, and it in particular has this horrible problem where it doesn't actually take the picture until a few seconds after you let go of the button and it makes the snapshot sound, still it's good in a pinch

I'm guessing that the problem was that this camera was worst than average in some way and QA rejected it. Considering that production was being tamped up at the time this must have cost Apple a small fortune. It will be interesting to see if any lawsuits result over this. It is really bad plublicity for the camera manufacture.


Dave

[deconstruct60]

This is a good point. The price difference between the two products is so minimal ($20) that the Touch might easily outstrip the nano in sales (unless all you really wanted was a tiny iPod).


The price differential would be much higher. The $199 Touch price point is achieved by selling last year's Touch at a lower price. The camera would have only been put on a the newer Touches. Those start at $299 which is a $120 gap between them and the highest priced nano. That is a relatively large gap. That is a 67% price increase. Those products are differentiated.

The $199 iPod is last year's tech and last year's engineering at a lower price ( because all the R&D is effectively paid off and the components are cheaper. Similarly, the factory is all configured and ready to go so the outsourcing manufactoring contract is going to be slightly cheaper also. ) The objective on the $199 Touch was to keep the additional R&D costs at zero to control costs.



Outside of Jobs telling Pogue that he wanted to control the cost of the Touch, I don't buy his reasoning that the Touch is being marketed as a gaming device. With all of the augmented reality apps beginning to appear in the App Store, the Touch will be left out of that gaming revolution unless it gets a camera. There's something else going on....

The chief gaming competitors to the Touch are the PSP and DS. Where are the Augmented reality games on those?????

Most of this "augmented reality" is far more based on the GPS receiver than on a camera. And the "gaming stuff" is highly suspect why a camera is really necessary. Running around or waving a camera is what? Largely seems to be an excuse to do object recognition of ridiculously easy to discern objects. ( otherwise it is the GPS that is really doing most of the work. .... "you are located here so will activate some information." )

[KnightWRX]

I do. They are nothing alike. They are complementary devices that share the same OS. You must be very unfamiliar with the tech to think otherwise.

3. iPhone has short battery life to keep it on the cell net.
4. iPhone has a $79 monthly cell net access charge - minimum.
5. iTouch has long battery life so playing music, video, games & apps doesn't kill it.
6. iTouch has Wi-Fi Internet access with no monthly charges.
7. iTouch has room in the non-phone section for more RAM to store a lot more music, video, games & apps.

Some of your points are just attempts at justifying the sheer ridiculousness of owning both products.

3. iPhone can last up to 300 hours in stand-by mode. Keeping a cell phone on the network is hardly a drain on the battery. The problem comes in the form of browsing mobile Internet/talking, which you can't do on an iPod Touch.
4. But yet you already have an iPhone, so you're already paying this charge. This is not a point that explains why you'd want a complementary iPod Touch.
5. The touch actually has a worse battery than iPhone. 6 hours of video playback vs 10 for the iPhone. The fact that it is thinner means the battery is probably not as good to accomodate for the space.
6. iPhone also has no charge Wi-Fi access with no monthly charge.
7. The only iPod Touch that has more room is the newly introduced 64 GB model. However, last year, Apple had the 32 GB iPhone 3G and the 32 GB iPod Touch as their top models, making it so that both shared the same amount of memory (and let's face it, the phone apps don't take up much space).

So in essence, owning both just means you have money to burn. Buy an extra USB cable and carry it around with you to charge your iPhone on the go instead of buying a 299$ device to try and save battery on your iPhone. And seriously, are you telling us that you don't have access to charging your iPhone once or twice every day ?

And this is an iTouch btw :

http://eightface.com/photo/elitekb_002_s.gif

Notice how that isn't an Apple product and that it isn't a digital media player or gaming device. It's just a keyboard.

[jmcguckin]

I was going to treat myself to an ipod touch this christmas, and with the prior rumors of a camera coming up I thought perfect!!!... thank god I waited and didn't get one over the summer.

But now, I'm horribly dissapointed because I won't buy one without the video camera. I'll always be thinking... if I'd waited 6 months or however long, I would of had a video camera in this.

Shame. For the first time as an apple consumer, I'm truly disappointed.

They'll redem themselves if they announce before xmas that a new camera added version will be released on a specific date come 2010. Then I'll ask santa clause for vouchers from the apple store and I'll happily wait.

If not, I'm getting a Zune... damn it.

exactly what will getting a Zune get you that you wouldn't already have in an iPod? I mean, considering you just spent an entire post complaining about how there's still no camera in the iPod touch, it just seems ironic that you'd opt for buying a (debatably) "lesser" device with, oh, right- no camera.

I mean no disrespect, but I think it's people like you whom Jobs had in mind when he said "you can't just ask customers what they want and then try to give that to them- by the time you get it built, they'll want something new." *sigh*

am I disappointed that there isn't (yet) a camera in the iPod touch? sure. am I done complaining about it because there's nothing my complaining will do other than add to the noise? absolutely. it's just that I'll also be hanging onto the $400 I would've otherwise spent on an iPod touch if Apple had included a camera in it... if/when they do, they'll have an iPod customer in me. until then, I can work with toting a few cd's around.

[mattwolfmatt]

I do. They are nothing alike. They are complementary devices that share the same OS. You must be very unfamiliar with the tech to think otherwise.

1. iPhone has Internet access everywhere there's cell service.
2. iPhone has GPS & Digital Compass for location & navigation apps.
3. iPhone has short battery life to keep it on the cell net.
4. iPhone has a $79 monthly cell net access charge - minimum.
5. iTouch has long battery life so playing music, video, games & apps doesn't kill it.
6. iTouch has Wi-Fi Internet access with no monthly charges.
7. iTouch has room in the non-phone section for more RAM to store a lot more music, video, games & apps.

I use the Touch for everything I don't need cell net access for so my iPhone's battery isn't dead by noon. Without a Touch to complement my iPhone I would be constantly making compromises about how I would only use my iPhone. Really dedicated mobile Mac people have and use both in quite complementary ways.

Wow, I used to have a ipod touch and a verizon phone that I always carried around. Then ebayed them both and bought an iphone so I didn't have to carry them both (also got GPS, better speaker, better camera, etc.) So glad I don't have to carry both devices again. True, the battery life is a little disappointing (especially if I play a lot of games that day) but I'm fine with it.

Also, I agree with KnightWRX. Owning both the iphone and the ipod touch is RIDICULOUS. My pockets are wearing out just thinking about that. Or do you have two belt holsters? Do you also have three beepers, a belt flashlight and a leatherman? ;)

[freemini]

Well when they do add a camera (with the touch-to-focus technology) to the iPod Touch, then they might sell one to me. Until then, it's just not convincing enough for me.

An auto-focus would not fit in that less space. The 3GS camera is thicker than the ipod touch. It just wouldn't fit in that space.

[KnightWRX]

exactly what will getting a Zune get you that you wouldn't already have in an iPod? I mean, considering you just spent an entire post complaining about how there's still no camera in the iPod touch, it just seems ironic that you'd opt for buying a (debatably) "lesser" device with, oh, right- no camera.

The Zune HD will get him : HD video (720p) playback on TV.

And I do agree with you, it has nothing to do with what he was complaining about, proving the fact that he was complaining just to hop on the whiner's bandwagon.

A Zune HD won't get him his precious camera. You have to wonder why all these people just don't go out and either upgrade their phone to a camera phone or just buy a frigging camera.

[freemini]

7. The only iPod Touch that has more room is the newly introduced 64 GB model. However, last year, Apple had the 32 GB iPhone 3G and the 32 GB iPod Touch as their top models, making it so that both shared the same amount of memory (and let's face it, the phone apps don't take up much space).

There was no 32gb iPhone 3G, lol.

[KnightWRX]

There was no 32gb iPhone 3G, lol.

You're right, that came with the 3GS.

[wizard]

This is rather interesting. I was planning on buying an iPod touch today, but now I may have to hold off, as the camera was one of the most fascinating rumors around. I was planning on just dealing with it, though now I'm not so sure.

Now maybe you know why Apple hates leaks and rumors. It causes confusion in the consummers mind.
The flip side to the camera issue is that it could be a very long time before an acceptable camera can be found to fit in Touch. We might not see anything at all with the next rev and no before Christmas model either. By the way I'm in the camp that is hoping that Apple can indeed fix whatever the problem was real soon and debut before Christmas.


From pure speculation, I would have to surmise that there are a few possible courses of action for apple here.

Well yeah that is always the case. Something few people realize.

I don't believe that there's a set duration that the new touches will be in production before the camera model is introduced.

Niether do I. However if they can get the problem resolved before the holiday shopping season I suspect they will punt. That is wait for the next rev.

I also have this idea in the back of my head that maybe they have plans to introduce that ten inch iPod tablet before the holidays. It would be nice to have the camera equiped Touch ready for that. Especially if they can bump the specs a bit. By bump I mean more RAM for apps and a lower power processor.

At this point no body is factoring in that other tablet. Apple could very well want to be able to apply some gloss to the older hardware when that comes out.

There wouldn't be much to worry about between the nano and touch, as the cheap $199 touch would likely not come with a camera. That means that consumers would have to choose between a $149 nano with video capabilities, or a $299 touch with video capabilities. Both models would be widely purchased due to the gap in pricing.

There never has been an issue here. All the concern about cannabilization is just noobs stroking themselves in the hopes that they come off looking smart. The only thing that matters to Apple is that they move product in increasing volume. Expanding the product line is a given to keep units sales increasing, thus special purpose iPods like iPhone.


Now, I can certainly understand that the iPod touch last-minute camera flaws may be valid rumors. I can also understand why Apple would keep their intended release date. But here's the thing, there's virtually no question that Apple intended to have a camera in the device, and even if the cameras were pulled last-minute, the space remains. I'm led to believe that regardless of the fact that several consumers have purchased iPod touches already, and several more will, that Apple will introduce cameras whenever they're fit to be released.
Exactly!
I'm also surmising that Apple will offer a service to conveniently put the cameras into existing models, for a bit of a fee.

Not a chance in hell. It would cost a fortune to do this tobdevices in the field. On top of that why would they retrofit a device that is already doing everything it has been advertised to do?
I'm absolutely positive Apple has contemplated the same things you all have ... if consumers buy now, and the camera is quickly introduced, there will be a massive uproar of angry patrons.

At this point I honestly believe that anybody stupid enough to complain about a quick introduction of a camera equiped Touch ought to be hauled off to Gitmo and tortured for days on end. We just don't need people that are that stupid in this country!!!!!!!!!!! The reality is all the info is there to make an informed buy, after which you have no right to complain about new prducts from any manufacture.

Besides that I've hadn't heard of a huge demand for a camera in the Touch. Sure we have the whinners here that got their hopes up with respect RUMORS about a camera but who really cares about them?

There has to be a logical fix to that problem, and that is simply offering the camera to those who couldn't wait for it.

From the standpoint of a business that is completely stupid. If Apple started to give away stuff because people couldn't wait for it the would go broke within a year. That is like saying Apple should give me a 2009 MBP because I couldn't wait any longer and got an early 2008 instead. The fact is I made the deal at the time for the product available at the time. Sure the newest MBPs are vastly improved but that doesn't mean I deserve a new one on Apple.

In the case of Touch it is pretty much the same idea. You buy hardware (make the deal) based on what is available at the time. I have to ask though does anybody out there think this is the last rev to the Touch iPods? I would hope not thus everyone should expect that Apple will continously upgrade the devices in the future.

Of course, this is all just speculation. I was planning on buying the 64GB touch today, though now I think I'll wait for the camera, as the app functionality with the cameras would be pristine.

Funny you use that word "pristine" which may very well be the opposite of what you get. Technically it is going to be very difficult to get very high quality images out of a camera that small. So don't count on the software delivering great results. Not to mention is the lack of a GPS or compass to work with some of that software.

In any event that word pristine just bothers me as we are talking ultra small cell phone cameras here. That word shouldn't come anywhere near a discussion like this.


Which brings me to a new point, everyone keeps addressing the fact that the iPod touch is becoming too close to the iPhone, and this will hurt iPhone sales. The iPod touch does not offer 3G connectivity, which is arguably the most convenient feature on the iPhone. For this reason, Apple really doesn't need to worry about the iPhone sales plummeting.

Exactly! Everytime somebody brings this up I want to grab a bat. The two markets are entirely different.


Here's something that it seems no one has considered:

By introducing cameras to the iPod touch line, just how much do you think Apple will make from iTunes Store app purchases?Actually I suspect very little. That due to the expected low quality of the camera. Even iPhone is less than attractive to photographers This would open up the entire world of photography apps to iPod touch users. The potential for profiting continually from the number of these is absolute.

Nope don't buy that at all. There are simply to many problems with respect to technical issues with cell phone cameras for much of that software to be taken seriously.

So, I would have to say that it's in Apple's best interests to offer a camera in the near future, and when I say "near future," I mean whenever it's ready.

Well if before the Holiday season yes. However resolving those technical issues may be next to impossible. The other problem is that this will be a low end camera going into an expensive device. At times it actually makes more sense to me to have such crap go into Nano.

But hey maybe they have a line on a micro camera of exceptional quality. My knowledge of optics tells me they don't. So in a way I kinda hope that they start over with the idea of a camera in the Touch. Instead of thinking thin simply come out with a pregnant model with a sensor that is close to point and shoot quality.

At least, we can all hope, right?

Hope - but we all hope for different things. I lean towards being against a camera in the Touch unless Apple can improve upon what is currently in the iPhone or most cell phones for that matter.

Personally I don't think a camera will stimulate sales the way some seem to think. The 64 GB model will likely do more to stimulate the buying public. I'm not saying people aren't interested in pics just that if you have a Touch you also likely have a cell phone with camera.

*Edit*

One more thought,

You have a lot of those ;). Keep them coming.

don't forget the iPhone contract with AT&T is almost expired. I don't think Apple wants a bunch of "Aw, it's cool that the iPhone is on my carrier now, but I already have an iPod touch ... " responses, so maybe they're holding off until both can be released at the same time-or-so, so that the iPhone gets the main attention. Who knows? There are so many variables ...
I don't believe you said that after earlier indicating that there is little interaction between the two products.

In any event I think Apple is tied to GSM and will simply wait for the other carriers to move to 4G. By the way at least one carrier has already said that they will go the route Apple is expected to take. I don't personally believe that Apple wants to make iPhones for dying tech.


Dave

[wizard]

I currently own an iPhone and have actually considered getting a Touch device to go along with it. Madness you say.

Well yeah it is in a way but the more I use my iPhone the more I have to watch the battery. Speaking of which the battery life on iPhone can be extremely short if you walk out of range of a base station. The iPhone will then crank up its 3G radio to full power to try to make a connection and will do so until that connections is found. This has become an issue for me because in some parts of the plant I work in no cell device can get a connection.

Then there is the issue of storage and what Apple lets you put on it. Currently I have a few videos on the device from iTunes U or other iPhone related training videos. This precludes the addition of music to the device right now. This makes the 64 GB model very attractive for keeping these sorts of videos portable. Also while I haven't filled my iPhone up with a bunch of useless apps I'm finding that many that are on the iPhone take up considerable space. In the end keeping a focus on specific usages may be a way out of my current storage limitations. Storage is in fact one of the reasons I was really hoping that the Classic would have been replaced with a large screen 'newton" type device. 256 GB in such a device would have been very nice for buffering multimedia files and or classes.

I don't believe my iPhone gets anywhere near 300 hours of stand by time. It didn't do that out of the box and it doesn't do it now.

As to money to burn that isn't the case and frankly is why I don't have two devices at this very moment in time. However the current device isn't really cutting the mustard for me either so I'm contemplating. By the way neither would the new iPhone 3GS.

In a nut shell it is becoming a bit frustrating that Apple isn't innovating within this product lineup. Having just one Touch iPod and one Iphone form factor is really limiting them with respect to what they can do internally. I suspect that one of their goals is to partially solve this problem with the PA Semi team, but even with a custom SoC the one thing they can't address is the space for Flash memory. This issue of Flash memory space is what drives my interest in a larger screen Touch, beyond the obvious advantage of the bigger screen itself.


Dave


Some of your points are just attempts at justifying the sheer ridiculousness of owning both products.

3. iPhone can last up to 300 hours in stand-by mode. Keeping a cell phone on the network is hardly a drain on the battery. The problem comes in the form of browsing mobile Internet/talking, which you can't do on an iPod Touch.
4. But yet you already have an iPhone, so you're already paying this charge. This is not a point that explains why you'd want a complementary iPod Touch.
5. The touch actually has a worse battery than iPhone. 6 hours of video playback vs 10 for the iPhone. The fact that it is thinner means the battery is probably not as good to accomodate for the space.
6. iPhone also has no charge Wi-Fi access with no monthly charge.
7. The only iPod Touch that has more room is the newly introduced 64 GB model. However, last year, Apple had the 32 GB iPhone 3G and the 32 GB iPod Touch as their top models, making it so that both shared the same amount of memory (and let's face it, the phone apps don't take up much space).

So in essence, owning both just means you have money to burn. Buy an extra USB cable and carry it around with you to charge your iPhone on the go instead of buying a 299$ device to try and save battery on your iPhone. And seriously, are you telling us that you don't have access to charging your iPhone once or twice every day ?

[deconstruct60]

Now maybe you know why Apple hates leaks and rumors.


Apple loves rumors. Leaks that feed rumors .... likes those too. Leaks that nuke a "one more thing..." moment of a 3-ring circus show; those they hate.

If Apple really hated rumors they'd tell folk what the roadmap was like the vast majority of companies out there. What is Intel selling next 6 months... totally known quantity. Not some super top secret, "surprise".



In any event I think Apple is tied to GSM and will simply wait for the other carriers to move to 4G. By the way at least one carrier has already said that they will go the route Apple is expected to take. I don't personally believe that Apple wants to make iPhones for dying tech.


Since when does GSM == ATT ? There are other GSM based carriers in the US. CDMA dying tech ..... what do you think 4G is based on? There are GSM protocols sprinkled on top for voice, but the transmission technology is CDMA. There are aspects of GSM that are dying just as much as CDMA.
The current technology phone networks aren't going anywhere. The fraction of subscribers that are on the bleeding edge tech is small. And won't be the supermajority for many years.

4G like 3G isn't just a technology it is also on several frequencies. ( a reason why T-mobiles 3G doesn't work with iPhone 3G; they use a different part of spectrum than ATT does. ). Same thing will be true with 4G... Verizon's 4G is going to be down in the old TV spectrum. ATT's may not be.

Besides there are chips that will use any of the data networks. It is really the "phone" (when not on the data networks) that is the more problematical difference.

[deconstruct60]

I suspect that one of their goals is to partially solve this problem with the PA Semi team, but even with a custom SoC the one thing they can't address is the space for Flash memory.

The PA Semi and SoC isn't going to solve much in the Radio (RF) part(s) of the device. They can collapse the computer aspects ( CPU , GPU, screen control, and perhaps eventually some of the RAM ), but the radios are all going to be something that Apple buys from someone else. SoC is going to have a bigger factor in reducing costs of phones than in making a significant energy saving contribution relative to RF ( cell, WiFi, radio-flavor-of-the-year ) energy costs.


One self imposed problem for the Touch is being smaller than the Phone. At this point it is thinner just for thiness sake. Not because it drops some mobility utility (otherwise the iPhone would have that 'defect'. )

The problem with collapsing 2, 3, or 4 devices you use frequently into one device is that if those usages are overlaps and/or continous you end up using the device all the time. Nothing is going to last if it is powered up and active for 6-7 hours at a time and that small (limited on battery storage capacity. There has no huge leap in energy storage density. How it is shaped is much more flexible now, but core batteries aren't getting smaller holding more charge; putting aside the shedding of protective containers.).

[Miko]

Maybe something like this happened:
A problem happened with camera's in the iPod Touches, specifically in the the 16GB models so they scrapped the 16GB models, removed camera's in the 32GB and 64GB and released an un-updated 8GB model along with it since they were not planning on bringing the 8GB model back so it receive no upgrades.

I think the real iPod Touch 3G with camera will be released in October.

Why?
- No where that I have seen, see Apple refer to this new ipod touch as a 3rd generation.
- Click here (http://www.bestbuy.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&MSCSProfile=3C79F0C7EA3162B21FF208C41AAB815BCDF4E261F9E2ED31EC8843FAE0A41F3DFE9B1A9AC26F9F14747C9D1D F2ADF31892109456592947CE8E1D8C49CD91D6CC82600E890F930618DF5C0C084D990C406DCBA7AA1D1E651E9540FB0CE70D 4DF51377B583690BD430716429A9D41EC7C9A4D7DB810BF1B74C&sku_id=0926INGFS10129542&catid=25953), there are pics of recently added iPod Touch 3G cases with a camera hole. And, well, look at the release date on them - October 14th, 2009. Last year Apple held an event on October 14th, 2008.

[RazHyena]

I was going to treat myself to an ipod touch this christmas, and with the prior rumors of a camera coming up I thought perfect!!!... thank god I waited and didn't get one over the summer.

But now, I'm horribly dissapointed because I won't buy one without the video camera. I'll always be thinking... if I'd waited 6 months or however long, I would of had a video camera in this.

Shame. For the first time as an apple consumer, I'm truly disappointed.

They'll redem themselves if they announce before xmas that a new camera added version will be released on a specific date come 2010. Then I'll ask santa clause for vouchers from the apple store and I'll happily wait.

If not, I'm getting a Zune... damn it.


....?

But the Zune doesn't have a camera, either.

[KnightWRX]

Maybe something like this happened:
A problem happened with camera's in the iPod Touches, specifically in the the 16GB models so they scrapped the 16GB models, removed camera's in the 32GB and 64GB and released an un-updated 8GB model along with it since they were not planning on bringing the 8GB model back so it receive no upgrades.

I think the real iPod Touch 3G with camera will be released in October.

Why?
- No where that I have seen, see Apple refer to this new ipod touch as a 3rd generation.
- Click here (http://www.bestbuy.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&MSCSProfile=3C79F0C7EA3162B21FF208C41AAB815BCDF4E261F9E2ED31EC8843FAE0A41F3DFE9B1A9AC26F9F14747C9D1D F2ADF31892109456592947CE8E1D8C49CD91D6CC82600E890F930618DF5C0C084D990C406DCBA7AA1D1E651E9540FB0CE70D 4DF51377B583690BD430716429A9D41EC7C9A4D7DB810BF1B74C&sku_id=0926INGFS10129542&catid=25953), there are pics of recently added iPod Touch 3G cases with a camera hole. And, well, look at the release date on them - October 14th, 2009. Last year Apple held an event on October 14th, 2008.

And I think you're grasping at straws. The October event last year was about notebooks, the music event is in September. This year, the october event will probably be about computers again, if there is one.

Apple aren't going to change the iPod Touches 1 month after introduction. The model is updated, featuring new price points, new processors and new capacities. For all intent and purposes, the new 32 GB and 64 GB models are evolutions, and as such, a new generation.

[TripHop]

Some of your points are just attempts at justifying the sheer ridiculousness of owning both products.

3. iPhone can last up to 300 hours in stand-by mode. Keeping a cell phone on the network is hardly a drain on the battery. The problem comes in the form of browsing mobile Internet/talking, which you can't do on an iPod Touch.
4. But yet you already have an iPhone, so you're already paying this charge. This is not a point that explains why you'd want a complementary iPod Touch.
5. The touch actually has a worse battery than iPhone. 6 hours of video playback vs 10 for the iPhone. The fact that it is thinner means the battery is probably not as good to accomodate for the space.
6. iPhone also has no charge Wi-Fi access with no monthly charge.
7. The only iPod Touch that has more room is the newly introduced 64 GB model. However, last year, Apple had the 32 GB iPhone 3G and the 32 GB iPod Touch as their top models, making it so that both shared the same amount of memory (and let's face it, the phone apps don't take up much space).

So in essence, owning both just means you have money to burn. Buy an extra USB cable and carry it around with you to charge your iPhone on the go instead of buying a 299$ device to try and save battery on your iPhone. And seriously, are you telling us that you don't have access to charging your iPhone once or twice every day ?
Seriously. The 32GB iPhone has only been available for these past 3 months. Prior to that and now again the iPod Touch is always full of twice as much RAM as the iPhone.

I ride a bicycle quite a bit of the time so I'm not in a car once I leave the office to keep it charged in one of those machines. But I do keep the phone plugged in while at the office all the time. My iPhone loses it's charge in no more than 1.5 days if I'm doing nothing with it. So the 300 hour standby time tout is a lie. Your claim the iPhone has better Video and Audio battery life than the iPod Touch is also a lie. My iPod Touch lasts for several days without a charge all the while listening to audio for many hours as well as reading the New York Times etc. If I tried to do that on my phone its battery would be dead before I got back from my daily bike ride around town.

I have had the dual 32GB pair for these past three months and my 1TB iTunes library only begins to fit in both. On the other hand I'm not going to buy the 64GB Touch without a camera because I want to be able to use camera necessary applications on it instead of only on the iPhone. And I believe it'll happen by the end of this winter.

But that's just me. I'm sure it's just as easy to rationalize having only an iPhone as it is to rationalize having both. We can respectfully disagree without lambasting each other's personalities can't we?Wow, I used to have a ipod touch and a verizon phone that I always carried around. Then ebayed them both and bought an iphone so I didn't have to carry them both (also got GPS, better speaker, better camera, etc.) So glad I don't have to carry both devices again. True, the battery life is a little disappointing (especially if I play a lot of games that day) but I'm fine with it.

Also, I agree with KnightWRX. Owning both the iphone and the ipod touch is RIDICULOUS. My pockets are wearing out just thinking about that. Or do you have two belt holsters? Do you also have three beepers, a belt flashlight and a leatherman? ;)It's not ridiculous when the phone's battery is below 20% and a charger isn't possible on my bicycle. Carrying both is not difficult with a double breasted summer sleeveless vest or winter shirt. I respectfully disagree and will always own and use both. I like to keep it mixed up all the time. From my point of view they are very complementary and not redundant at all. ;)

[ThatsMeRight]

Pff, some of you guys are getting mad because of nothing. Oh well, maybe you are: you are mad because some stupid rumors didn't come true. But heh, that's why it's called a rumor.

Heh. It's maybe good that the difference between the iPhone and the iPod Touch is becoming bigger. You can see it like this: the iPhone is actually an iPod Touch which is able to make calls.

The battery from the iPhone is fine, butif you lose service regullary than you can get a sign with "No battery" indeed. Well, if you already know at forehand "over here I won't have a 3G-network all the time" than you turn 3G off and connect to the regular EDGE/GRPS-network.

So the iPhone is an "iPod Touch which can make calls plus a little bit extra (much higher price because of AT&T)." The iPod Touch is just an "iPhone which is not able to make calls plus it misses some extras."

And oh, be happy there is actually a camera with colours into the iPod Nano. Like 50 years ago cameras were expensive, and didn't have such a 'high quality' like now a days. 50 years ago a lot of cameras even didn't have colours.

Be happy with what you get, and don't get angry about something that doesn't exist. Again: you are all angry because of something that is not announced, and is not in it right now.

[PeterQVenkman]

Oh you poor boy! I'm truly saddened to see you in turmoil over this, what can be done to lighten your burden? How about growing up.

Now I understand, we are dealing with a spoiled brat here. How about this go out and earn your own money for this iPod you think is coming.

Poor boy what will you do if they aren't on the market next year?

Dave

Thanks for the lecture, Dad. Now can I borrow the car?

[KnightWRX]

I ride a bicycle quite a bit of the time so I'm not in a car once I leave the office to keep it charged in one of those machines.

I doubt your bike trip is long enough to drain the entire iPhone battery even if you're listening to audio all the way and receiving SMS or calls (I hope you're not taking said calls or replying while actually riding).

But I do keep the phone plugged in while at the office all the time. My iPhone loses it's charge in no more than 1.5 days if I'm doing nothing with it. So the 300 hour standby time tout is a lie. Your claim the iPhone has better Video and Audio battery life than the iPod Touch is also a lie. My iPod Touch lasts for several days without a charge all the while listening to audio for many hours as well as reading the New York Times etc. If I tried to do that on my phone its battery would be dead before I got back from my daily bike ride around town.

Might be a lie, but it's straight from Apple's spec page. Are you sure you left the device 1.5 days straight without receiving a call, a SMS, or even taking it out of stand-by mode ? I usually have battery life that's pretty close to what Apple claims in all my devices.

Again, the devices are redundant. You seem to want 2 because when one does go out, you have the other. That's not complementary, because by that logic, 2 iPhones would do just as good a job for you as 1 iPhone and 1 touch. 2 touches however wouldn't because you do need the phone part.

[Meriana]

Hm, doesn't have to mean much that theres space for a camera. It just means that Apple has considered it for a certain point in the future that they ipod touch could have a camera.

Maybe they just designed the internals that way that IF they decide to add a camera to the ipod touch, they wouldn't have to redesign it. (and save a lot of money).

[Tylerrr]

Dave, interesting vivisection of my post. A lot of your comments certainly do make more sense than what I was thinking. I'll have to admit, some of my ideas were pushing it.

I'll also have to admit that I'm currently typing my responses on my unibody macbook -- I got mine before they upgraded it to the pro version. Am I upset? No, not really, it's a fantastic computer, and like you mentioned with the iPod, I purchased what was advertised, so I haven't a right to complain, regardless.

It does prove that there's a definite possibility that Apple may upgrade the touch line within a few months, as opposed to the next post-Labor Day iPod event.

Sorry about my word choice with "pristine," but based on my busy class schedule and vast array of artistic hobbies, I would have to say I'm excited to have a camera integrated with my music player (my camera is kind of bulgy)

That's all I have at the present moment. For the time being, I'm exhausted. zzzzz.

[DaveLG526]

They need a mini-iPad:

Camera
Video
GPS
Games
3G data/web connection

...On Verizon

[TripHop]

I doubt your bike trip is long enough to drain the entire iPhone battery even if you're listening to audio all the way and receiving SMS or calls (I hope you're not taking said calls or replying while actually riding).I'm using the iPod Touch to conserve time between charges on the iPhone. While the iPod Touch will play music for hours over several days time, the phone will not due to it's connection with the cell network all the time which eats the battery too quickly where I live - even in just Edge mode. :(Might be a lie, but it's straight from Apple's spec page. Are you sure you left the device 1.5 days straight without receiving a call, a SMS, or even taking it out of stand-by mode ? I usually have battery life that's pretty close to what Apple claims in all my devices.

Again, the devices are redundant. You seem to want 2 because when one does go out, you have the other. That's not complementary, because by that logic, 2 iPhones would do just as good a job for you as 1 iPhone and 1 touch. 2 touches however wouldn't because you do need the phone part.300 hours of standby time is 12.5 days. You telling me anyone here can testify to going 12 days between charges with their iPhone? Like I said before, the standby time specification is an outright LIE conceived by some overzealous marketing person. :mad:

I just don't perceive redundancy the same way you do Knight. If I only had an iPhone, I am certain - well I have in fact experienced it - the iPhone cannot last even a full day of the kind of multipurpose use I would want to give it. The iPod Touch is the perfect iPhone companion for all those battery intensive tasks my iPhone can't keep up with before its battery goes into the red zone while the iPod Touch's battery stays charged for several days although I am listening to music and web browsing in Wi-Fi zones a lot on it. I think where I live the cell system seems to take a lot out of the iPhone's battery too quickly even though I have the G3 switch in the OFF position as often as possible. :(

I don't see needing to keep looking around for AC sockets or driving a car I only use once or twice a week for a few minutes each time as a way to keep an iPhone only scenario working for me. I think I may have quite a different lifestyle than the one you have which makes you think they are redundant while my experience finds them very complementary and a necessary duo for a complete and happy Mobile Mac, iPod and iPhone experience. :)

[Takuro]

The entire thread seems to have gone off on a tangent concerning an argument whether the iPod Touch stacks up to the iPhone.

The fact is that they both have an overlap, but they are also different enough that Apple deemed it appropriate to create two different product to address two different markets using the same iPhone OS platform. If you're into media and battery life, an iPod is for you. If you're into a portable "swiss army knife"-style cellphone that does everything, at the cost of battery life, get an iPhone.

Back on the topic of the camera. This is getting pretty drawn out. I think at this point we know there's going to be an updated iPod in the future that will make use of the giant, empty space in the 3rd gen models. But until then, the details surrounding the features and specs of such a camera is pure speculation.

I think MacRumors and AppleInsider are giving this whole issue a disproportionate amount of coverage in order to save face. They had a lot riding on their credibility, despite the fact that they might have got a last-minute tip suggesting the camera had been nixed.

[MM2270]

Well, whatever the case is concerning a cam in the iPod touch, my money will either be held onto a bit longer, OR, I will get a refurb 16 GB 2nd gen touch from the Apple Store. For the same $199 price as the so called "updated" 8 GB model Apple is now selling, I'll get an extra 8 GB of storage and basically the same device. The 8 GB model didn't get the speed boost enhancement that the 32 and 64 GB models did. It also doesn't come with the headphones w/ remote. There may be some under the case enhancements which will be revealed in time that the 8 GB model has over the 2nd gen touch, but since Apple isn't saying, its all speculation.

So beyond the lower storage, its essentially the same device, for the same price.
I'm not spending $299 on the 32 GB only to have Apple update it within 6 months or something with a camera and then be pissed I dropped $300 on it.

[6daniels]

i have a feeling that on october 14th there going to announce an iPod Touch 3G :D Probably its going to be on the 16 GB

[liveccam]

Too bad there is no camera or other meaningful enhancements. Steve could have sold me one if it had been worth it.

[Ram Mac]

I hope they put one on. That would be nice

[iPhone 62S]

They are, and here's the real reasons why it wasen't put there in the first place:
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1292.jpg

:p

[joshh20]

Why doesn't apple put a camera in the iPod touch? The new nano has a camera. So the iPod touch has only a few more advantages than the nano!! It has the room for it so why don't they make some money. They know that people will buy an nano with a camera so the iPod touch should get 10x more buys than it!!!!!!!!





http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/11/apple-still-planning-camera-in-ipod-touch/)

http://images.macrumors.com/article/2009/09/11/191911-compare2_500.jpg

Another interesting possibility found in iFixit's (http://www.ifixit.com/) teardown (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/11/third-generation-ipod-touch-teardown-reveals-802-11n-capable-wi-fi-chip/) of the 3rd Generation iPod Touch was finding of an empty space where on the circuit board that could house a camera. The location is consistent with the location of the rumored iPod Touch camera and is distinct from the previous generation iPod Touch design.

Pictured above is the 2nd Generation iPod Touch on the left and the 3rd Generation iPod Touch on the right. The round metal piece seen in the middle of the 2nd Gen iPod Touch board is actually an antenna cable socket which has been moved on the 3rd Gen iPod Touch, which only has a black plastic spacer in that place. According to iFixit (http://www.ifixit.com), an iPod-nano style camera would fit in that location.

The finding is consistent with a report (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/09/10/ipod_touch_with_camera_remains_in_apples_pipeline.html) from AppleInsider which claimed that the iPod Touch with camera was a real product but had been scrapped about a month ago. The rumor site also believes that Apple is still planning on adding camera capabilities to the iPod Touch in the near future.

Article Link: Apple Still Planning Camera in iPod Touch? (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/11/apple-still-planning-camera-in-ipod-touch/)

[Sky Blue]

That's quite a bump.