I think we can all agree that the best iPod is the iPod touch. But why have the iPod nano, shuffle and Classic? The iPod touch can do everything the others can. I don't see the purpose.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPod Is the iPod nano, iPod shuffle and the iPod Classic dead?
- Thread starter Retina MacBook
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Feeding the troll anyways...
The iPod classic will be there until SSD's can be had for cheaper, enabling Apple to sell the iPod Touch with 256GB of memory for the same price or cheaper than the Classic. That day is not far off.
The shuffle is still there as a low cost alternative for people who just don't want a touch, or people who like a small unit for a workout, which is what the nano's purpose also serves.
Just the other day, I was swimming laps in the pool, and the swimmer next to me had a waterproofed iPod shuffle. That's not really possible yet with the other iPods, not to mention the unit's small size.
The iPod classic will be there until SSD's can be had for cheaper, enabling Apple to sell the iPod Touch with 256GB of memory for the same price or cheaper than the Classic. That day is not far off.
The shuffle is still there as a low cost alternative for people who just don't want a touch, or people who like a small unit for a workout, which is what the nano's purpose also serves.
Just the other day, I was swimming laps in the pool, and the swimmer next to me had a waterproofed iPod shuffle. That's not really possible yet with the other iPods, not to mention the unit's small size.
Some more troll food...
To further expand on the discussion...why have an iPod touch when you could have an iPhone?
No need preaching to the choir, I'm just trying to make "Retina MacBook" understand
To further expand on the discussion...why have an iPod touch when you could have an iPhone?
No need preaching to the choir, I'm just trying to make "Retina MacBook" understand