A Brief First Look at Apple's New 16 GB iPod Touch

[MacDarcy]

I don't understand this move. Why get rid of the camera? Why not just charge $229 for the 16gig iPod touch WITH the camera? People that get an iPod touch usually don't have an iphone. It's usually teens or people who actually use their iPod touch AS a phone! Both groups to me would want a camera on this device.

But whatever. What do I know? :-D

 

[barkmonster]

More thin good, storage bad over-priced garbage!

You can get a 160Gb iPod for the same price. Come off it, who are they kidding?

 

[randolorian]

That's what the new iPhone should look like. I don't like the harsh, sharp edges of the current line of phones. The curves are one thing I preferred on the original iPhone.

 

[broncopde]

iPad 1 anyone?

The more I look at it the more it reminds me of the iPad 1 (almost like an iPad 1 was hit be a shrink ray).

 

[timborama]

I don't understand this move. Why get rid of the camera? Why not just charge $229 for the 16gig iPod touch WITH the camera? People that get an iPod touch usually don't have an iphone. It's usually teens or people who actually use their iPod touch AS a phone! Both groups to me would want a camera on this device.

But whatever. What do I know? :-D

You're absolutely right. Now Apple has introduced fragmentation. Now not all 5th gen iPod touches have rear cameras. It is a very strange move on Apples part. For $70 more you can get 2X memory AND rear camera. This isn't a smart move, maybe at $199 it might have been.

 

[lars666]

More thin good, storage bad over-priced garbage!

You can get a 160Gb iPod for the same price. Come off it, who are they kidding?

You can't compare prices this way of two products which are that different.

 

[Knockworstface]

Looks awesome. Very nice and sleek.

 

[Jsameds]

You can't compare prices this way of two products which are that different.

I read an Engadget post about the iPod Touch yesterday. One of the top rated comments was comparing the iTouch to a Nexus 7. Lol.

 

[Prof.]

Issue is battery, a phone needs lots more of it...

Nah, just take out the battery all together and use a Mophie Juicepack.

 

[Walter White]

I seriously wouldn't mind an iPhone design that closely matches everything I just saw.

I always liked iPod touch design more than that of an iPhone.

 

[skeep5]

wow the fuzzy focus of this video is beyond irritating. 229 and no camera? pass.

 

[576316]

It does look really nice. As others have said, I wouldn't mind having an iPhone which looks like this. Although I doubt the iPhone could be that thin because of the network hardware and stuff. It does seem like this could be a test for a cheap iPhone version?

 

[otismotive77]

wow the price is great. i'll make sure i add one more member to my ipod family by buying that sleek and slim ipod

 

[Jsameds]

wow the fuzzy focus of this video is beyond irritating. 229 and no camera? pass.

The original 5Gb iPod was $399 and that didn't even have a colour screen.

 

[barkmonster]

You can't compare prices this way of two products which are that different.

As it's a music player first and W-ifi only PDA second. It's not worth the asking price for that amount of storage if they've removed it's only redeeming feature just to shave £50 off the already inflated price of the 32Gb iPod Touch model above it.

 

[Plutonius]

You're absolutely right. Now Apple has introduced fragmentation. Now not all 5th gen iPod touches have rear cameras. It is a very strange move on Apples part. For $70 more you can get 2X memory AND rear camera. This isn't a smart move, maybe at $199 it might have been.

Many people just purchase on price. I'm sure this will sell well.

 

[lars666]

As it's a music player first and W-ifi only PDA second, it's not worth the asking price for that amount of storage if they've removed it's only redeeming feature just to shave £50 off the already inflated price of the 32Gb iPod Touch model above it.

We can argue about if the iPod touch standing for itself (or in comparison to the better models) is worth its price, but you've originally compared the iPod Touch 32GB to the iPod Classic 160GB in the "You get so much more storage for the same price!"-way which is absolutely ridiculous considering the different type of storage (HDD against SSD), the possibilities of usage (simple music/video player against iOS touch screen device running all apps) to only mention two factors. By the way: An iPod Touch running full iOS definitely is NOT a music player first, at least not by its capabilities.

 

[Count Blah]

Good value, I think a lot of kids would like to have one.

Last I checked, kids take LOTS of pictures and videos. This dumbed down version is a no go for that market, IMHO. I'm not sure who this is targeted at, but it sure ain't kids.

 

[damir00]

Zzzz.....

 

[WilliamG]

It's more than likely he/she was using a 50mm lens that creates that depth of field effect seen in the shots. It's almost unavoidable.

Not true. He's just using a wide aperture. He didn't need to, but why not, eh?

Also, it's clear to me this iPod was released so as to provide a more substantial price difference between the iPod touch and the iPad mini.

 

[Minhimalism]

The original 5Gb iPod was $399 and that didn't even have a colour screen.

How does that justify a $229 iPod touch that doesn't have a camera when even the $199 last gen iPod touch has a camera? (albiet not a good one, I know.)

 

[barkmonster]

We can argue about if the iPod touch standing for itself (or in comparison to the better models) is worth its price, but you've originally compared the iPod Touch 32GB to the iPod Classic 160GB in the "You get so much more storage for the same price!"-way which is absolutely ridiculous considering the different type of storage (HDD against SSD), the possibilities of usage (simple music/video player against full iOS touch screen device running all apps) to only mention two factors. By the way: An iPod Touch with full iOS definitely is NOT a music player first, at least not by its capabilities.

Price for Price the 16Gb iPod touch is identical to the iPod but offers 1/10th the storage and limited iPhone like wifi functionality.

£199 either gets you this:

http://store.apple.com/uk/browse/home/shop_ipod/family/ipod_touch_16gb

or this:

http://store.apple.com/uk/browse/home/shop_ipod/family/ipod_classic

There's no contest for a music player and as it's other functionality is of limited use and it's likely to offer more in the region of <14Gb of actual usable storage minus the usual "other" data that sucks even more space away like any other iOS based device no matter how few apps you have installed, it's even less value for money.

 

[bluespark]

I am confused about the intention behind releasing this model - now. WWDC is planned in around 10 days. And rumors say, new iPhone will be coming with fingerprint sensors and this also means, iOS7 will also support it. Usually releases of iPhone and iPod touch are kept together as they resemble in terms of basic iOS functionality.

If they are really releasing fingerprint sensors in new iPhone, then New iPod Touch with fingerprint sensors will be released. Then this is already obsolete.

Or maybe they are not going to release new iPhone with rumored features.

I'm not aware of any credible rumors of new iOS devices to be released at WWDC.

 

[lars666]

Price for Price the 16Gb iPod touch is identical to the iPod but offers 1/10th the storage and limited iPhone like wifi functionality.

In this case, be happy using your iPod Classic for all the stuff the iPod Touch can do. You've made a great deal, man!

 

[teknikal90]

The most beautiful Apple device ever.
But can anyone tell me why the ipod touch needs that ugly wifi radio window in the back when the ipad (mini) doesnt?