It's the Apple fanboi way - because Apple does it, it makes it right, screw everyone else's needs.Why do you care? If t negatively affects others, why would you wish this?
It's the Apple fanboi way - because Apple does it, it makes it right, screw everyone else's needs.Why do you care? If t negatively affects others, why would you wish this?
AppleWatch + AirPods are Apple's workout solution. It took the place of the iPod Shuffle.
[doublepost=1501173615][/doublepost]
Huh? Why would your cell provider subsidize your iPod Touch? iPhone SE is $399 unsubsidized.
[doublepost=1501193633][/doublepost]It would be nice if they added Apple car play to the iPods!!
Apple today tweaked its iPod touch storage and pricing configurations after discontinuing the iPod nano and iPod shuffle.
![]()
Apple's new iPod touch lineup is priced as following in the United States:
o 32GB: $199
o 128GB: $299
o 16GB and 64GB discontinued
Apple's previous iPod touch lineup was priced as following:
o 16GB: $199
o 32GB: $249
o 64GB: $299
o 128GB: $399
The new configurations are currently in stock on Apple's online store in the same colors as previously: Silver, Gold, Space Gray, Pink, Blue, and Red.
Apple last updated the iPod touch in July 2015 with an Apple A8 chip and 8-megapixel rear-facing iSight camera.
Article Link: Apple Adjusts iPod Touch Prices and Storage: 32GB For $199, 128GB For $299
Ever try running with an iPhone in your short pocket?
Sure it looks like you're well endowed but it's highly uncomfortable.
And running with an iPod Touch would be much different? (Admittedly, I know it is thinner and slightly lighter, but it is still the same size.)
For running, the superior choice is an iPod Shuffle or an Apple Watch.
its quite simplehonestly, I'm not sure why they even make these anymore....
An iPod touch doesn't need cellular service. You can get a brand new SE for $159 on straight talk. Sure, it's tied to a carrier, but you needn't have it active. It would still work over wifi, just as the iPod Touch would, except it has a newer chipset and more features.
I agree. Shuffle would be ideal for running. The iPod Touch is much lighter than a phone, but still, it'll fall out of a pocket when jogging.And running with an iPod Touch would be much different? (Admittedly, I know it is thinner and slightly lighter, but it is still the same size.)
For running, the superior choice is an iPod Shuffle or an Apple Watch.
Yes. They have the same processors is the iPhone six series.Does anyone know if these are still able to be up-to-date with iOS (meaning on 10.3.3)?
Less upkeep, it already runs iOS instead of an old proprietary OS.I don't understand why they would cancel the nano and shuffle but keep the touch? I see more use out of super small music player than an ipod touch when everyone owns a smartphone that can do everything a touch can and has always has internet connectivity. I guess maybe for kids? Or maybe just lowering the price to sell remaining stock off before discontinuing.
I agree. Only Rose Gold Apple product I've liked cost ten grand.The Touch has a better Pink color than that Rose Gold.
Nope. This is a prepaid phone and not a subsidized contract phone. The Verizon ones are unlocked. This was well documented and discussed when Best Buy had them on sale a week or two ago for $150 or $159.
He is stuck on whatever he believes and refuses to listen to anyone else in this entire debate. And his point is: iPhone SE can be bought at a cheaper price than iPod Touch so iPod Touch is redundant.Read the reviews on Best Buy. Everyone is saying they're locked and can't be activated on other carriers. Why would Verizon let you do that??
Given this iPod really has more in common with the iPhone and iPad than it does with any other iPod that has ever existed, I think they should rename it to:
iPad Nano
It runs iOS but doesn't have cellular, and does way more than just music, just like all base-model iPads.
how are the sales on these? can't see how people still buy them? i may be in the minority.
I wonder how much less it costs to build a technologically dated iPod touch vs. an iPhone? How expensive would it be to take the current iPhone, strip out the phone specific technology, and create a truly updated iPod touch that might appeal to parents? That would seem to be the logical market for an iPod touch today, and there are 25 million kids 6-11 years old in the U.S. alone. For parent who aren't buying their children a phone, the only reasonable option is an outdated iPod touch or an Android device. Seems like a lost opportunity to get kids to use Apple products...
I don't understand why they would cancel the nano and shuffle but keep the touch? I see more use out of super small music player than an ipod touch when everyone owns a smartphone that can do everything a touch can and has always has internet connectivity. I guess maybe for kids? Or maybe just lowering the price to sell remaining stock off before discontinuing.
Sorry if somebody already mentioned this but once again a bummer for UK as prices go up... Base iPod touch was £20 cheaper at £179 before this adjustment (they are now £199), and Apple refurb store had the 'old' 16GB ones for £139, but now even those have gone up £10 to £149...
I don't understand why they would cancel the nano and shuffle but keep the touch? I see more use out of super small music player than an ipod touch when everyone owns a smartphone that can do everything a touch can and has always has internet connectivity. I guess maybe for kids? Or maybe just lowering the price to sell remaining stock off before discontinuing.