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.
A Closer Look at Apple's New iPod Touch Colors and Features
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You must be skimming through it. From the Touch 5 spec sheet
https://support.apple.com/kb/SP657?locale=en_US
- Mercury-free LED-backlit display
But, if you remember, the Touch 5g did not have an ambient light sensor for the back light. Now, perhaps, they have killed the back light altogether in the Touch 6g.
Perhaps you should take a look at the Apple website to see the specifications of the new Touch 6 before claiming it doesn't have a backlight
. - Mercury-free LED-backlit display
Perhaps you should take a look at the Apple website to see the specifications of the new Touch 6 before claiming it doesn't have a backlight
http://www.apple.com/ipod-touch/specs/
- Mercury-free LED-backlit display
OK, I looked with my feet.
It is odd that they didn't put it up with the display description. Really odd. Like, was that blurb at the bottom a cut and paste from the 5g? But anyway...
No kidding...
On a related tangent, I ran into a gorgeous woman who worked on the documentation for the FoxPro database software. I quoted the ages old joke about documentation being like sex... She laughed. She said that I probably wouldn't believe it, but the programmers did not write the documentation, and well, they really didn't have much input into the documentation at all.
That kinda surprised me. They apparently wrote the documentation off of the 'this is how it 'should' work' lists, rather than how it actually did work. That caused a lot of rewrites, and some changes in the program too actually.
Interesting that the tail wags the dog as much as the dog wags the tail...
But anyway... Thought I'd regurgitate that... Because...
She was really cute, BTW...
There is no way for a LCD with a resolution that high to be readable without backlight.
The only technology that could do that is OLED.
However what is true, is the iPod touch 5th and 6th Gen not having an ambient light sensor.
OK, but this is mentioned anywhere on the main page (your quote is from the support page) and why isn't this mentioned in the display specs like all their other devices? That's where most people would look.You must be skimming through it
https://support.apple.com/kb/SP657?locale=en_US
- Mercury-free LED-backlit display
As I posted earlier, it is mentioned in the main specs (not just the support page) although it still isn't listed under the display specs (no idea why).
http://www.apple.com/ipod-touch/specs/
Do a search on the main spec page and you will see
- Mercury-free LED-backlit display
When I was referring to 'back light', I was *thinking* of the ability to read it in the dark, but yes, you are totally correct, without a back light, the device would be unreadable.
A friend of mine got a Garmin fenix 3 same time as I did. The default screen scheme is white on black, and no back light. It drove them nuts until I showed them the back light button, and how to adjust the back light timeout. Now they love it. Your mileage may vary...
I still find it odd that the back light isn't mentioned at the display section, and you have to scroll all the way down to the bottom to the 'Environment' section. But anyway, we've flogged this poor horse enough...
Thanks for pointing that out. That makes the inconsistency on Apple website all the more odd, as I would imagine most people would do what I did i.e. look a the tech specs pages and compare them.
Yeah, that tiny gap between the glass and aluminum body is a chin-stubble magnet. I found that out the hard way.
I have a 5th gen nano in that blue. The color is part of why I love it (It's also feature-packed iPod)
It has facetime and you can call people using Google Hangouts... what else are you looking for? an actual dedicated ear piece?
That's just not how a business works. For a start you could flip your wording on it's head and say "iPhone pricing shows how under priced these iPods are".
The price of a product has so many variables, there are numerous strategies... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pricing_strategies.
Value is important, because if as you say the iPhone was "overpriced", we would not see record breaking sales quarter after record breaking sales quarter. People will pay if they see value in it - http://www.ecosystemvaluation.org/1-01.htm
Not to mention the iPhone is the jewel in their crown. Technologies are generally developed for the iPhone and trickle down to the iPod (A-series chips for example). Similar to cars, you'll often see the new toys developed for the S-Class Mercs, a few years later they'll appear on the E-Class and C-Class. You pay a lot more for an S-Class than an E when compared spec to spec, but it's the wrong way to compare pricing.
What possibly no one else has mentioned is the engineering that has to go into the iPhone, that the iPod basically skips.
The antennas, the testing, the simulations, the massive number of components that have to be checked to see if they will play together. The endless prototypes (that seem to be lost in bars) and the massive amounts of legal time preparing the proper documents for certification. The testing alone can run hundreds of thousands of dollars from what I've heard, and there are multiple tests that need to be performed.
The iPod just has to have the basic tests, and is, functionally, a rather simple device. Apple chintz's on the display, the memory, and the processor for the iPod. I'll bet the chassis isn't their best work either.
But that being said, I'm glad they updated the Touch. I'd be somewhat lost without it. I hate using my iPhone for traveling, and smoking the battery.
If anything, perhaps the comments should be that the iPod is actually overpriced, for what you are getting... Cheap display, throttled processor, no FM capability, no messaging (is that right?) capability.
Damned overpriced pocket filler.
And I want one. Please please please...
If you can call someone over wifi what other "phone capabilities" are you looking for? Like a SIM card and a mobile chip? Then you're just buying an iPhone, not an iPod.
iPhone is too expensive. 5C was supposed to be a cheap iPhone but it is still expensive. Thats why they lose to Android so badly outside of the US. What Apple needs is a really cheap iPhone to fill that gap. Adding a sim card to iPod Touch would solve that issue.
Then it becomes an iPhone, not an iPod Touch. An iPhone is an iPod Touch with cellular functionalities and GPS.
If you can't afford an iPhone then you shouldn't get an iPhone. This is an iPod, if they put a SIM chip in it should only be so you can get data access. But then Apple will also charge $129 more for those parts and you'll complain about that too (equaling $329 for 16gb) and that the camera is inferior to the iPhone's, it doesn't have TouchID and the processor is slower. Whine whine whine.
Why don't you just get an iPad Mini 3 LTE? It solves all your issues.
I also like how you're telling the company that sold 47.5 million iPhones this Quarter (12.2 million MORE than this time last year) how to sell more iPhones.
Yes, it is a bit irritating to have discussions about the new iPod Touch liberally peppered with complaints about why the iPod Touch is not an iPhone (rooted in a desire to simply wanting an inexpensive iPhone).
I'm hoping that as soon as more people have the new iPod Touch in-hand that we'll be able to get the conversation back on track.