I think this may quite possibly be a similar idea of what they will do for a low cost iPhone.
It just seems out of the norm. for Apple.
It just seems out of the norm. for Apple.
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.
Apple Launches New 16 GB iPod Touch With No Rear Camera for $229
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They could market this as a the iPad - Selfie Edition. 
Sounds to me like they could have omitted both cameras all together.
Sounds to me like they could have omitted both cameras all together.
Yes. My nephew wanted an iPhone but at his age his parents said no. Instead, they bought him an iPod Touch. He has nearly all the benefits of the cell phone minus the data plan.
o.0 Blind people do not need a rear facing camera when they use an iPod Touch ... think about that for a moment.
You would think there would be more noise but then agian all the rumor sites are on it. At least Apple did the right thing and made this a 16 GB model. That has me holding out hope that the laptops and other machines will get decent storage updates.
Makes all the sense in the world, Apple does this almost every year where modest updates get pushed out just before WWDC. Expect a couple of more releases before the big event.
I would not want a 16GB version but having my 4th Gen iPod for as long as I have, the 64GB model, I rarely use the camera on it, front or back. Plus I have so much music on it, that I had to remove the pictures and and most the apps I did have on it. My iPod has music and workout apps on it only. So 128GB iPod with no camera on it is fine with me as well.
There will be quite a lot to talk about on WWDC! This new iPod would easy be overshadowed
Yeah, if you consider un-sub'ed costs for an iPhone 5 vs. a IPT 5th gen, there's a major cost difference (or like you pointed out, cost of a 2 year contract).
I've recommended iPod Touch for quite a few family members, it's extremely portable, has a beautiful display, works great for music, games, communication, er, photos before this model
... and in our family, most folks are talking to other family members or friends with iOS devices, so with FaceTime, iMessages, etc., they've got just as much functionality as an iPhone with no recurring costs.
Or they can just keep selling boatloads of iPads. Either or really.
But yes, I think the days of $100 memory increases will eventually have to end.
They're creating a new line of cheaper alternatives, it's probably the best decision Apple has made in recent times because let's face it, the whole reason there exists major alternatives to Apple products is because they undercut Apple's prices, but if this is anything to go by... They forgot the "cheap" bit.
$220? Should be 180 or something... Why does Apple insist on it's monstrous profit margins for absolutely every product???
Still, of the two cameras, why wouldn't Apple remove the front one?
I would think more people would use a rear camera for pictures than a front facing one for FaceTime.
Maybe I just have a hard time imagining myself never using the camera on that device. I use the one on my iPhone all the time, despite having a Canon 30D and two film cameras at home. A lot of times I don't carry those cameras with me but the iPhone is always there.
It wouldn't be any different with the iPod Touch. We live in an interesting world, sometimes capturing that can be priceless. I just don't see Apple's angle here unless it's to appeal to weenies.
For sure. The cost for Apple to double the storage is literally a few bucks at most. Obviously its about profit margins but doubling the storage for 100 bucks more is 1000+ percent markup just due to storage. This is how they will make up for the rumored sub-$300 mini pricing for fall.
It's not a phone. so either you are a
1. A person who carries another phone-- which has a camera
2. Someone who doesn't need (or want) to carry a phone.
...
o.0 Blind people do not need a rear facing camera when they use an iPod Touch ... think about that for a moment.
Blind folks are probably more in need of an app that scans and reads text outloud than folks with sight. A rear facing camera is more effective as being "replacement" eyes than a front facing camera would be when naturally holding the device.
http://appadvice.com/applists/show/apps-for-the-visually-impaired
http://assistivetechnology.about.com/od/ATCAT6/tp/Top-10-Iphone-Apps-For-The-Visually-Impaired.htm
Given that one of the primary targets is younger folks who skype/facetime/video chat one another that would a bigger looser for than loss of the camera to take pictures of other people/things.
The front camera is cheaper too. Dropping it isn't going to move the price much if at all ( with Apple's round to nearest $100, or $50, pricing).
Eventually it may get there. Certainly if just want a tablet to get on the web and play games, it is a bit high.
Brilliant!
get a second hand iPhone - more than enough.
wait till iPhone 5S - there will be plenty of used iPhone 5 especially SIM unlocked Verizon model (though it will work only in 4G not LTE).
get a second hand iPhone - more than enough.
wait till iPhone 5S - there will be plenty of used iPhone 5 especially SIM unlocked Verizon model (though it will work only in 4G not LTE).
They have stockholders. Apple is on this planet to make money. That "fun" or "game changing" went out the window in 1980 when apple went public
I wished both the latest iPhone and the iPad Mini had a black front but a silver back option. (I don't like the white front as I like my media framed in black to make it pop).
This looks really nice.
This looks really nice.
They could market this as a the iPad - Selfie Edition.
Sounds to me like they could have omitted both cameras all together.
Yes. My nephew wanted an iPhone but at his age his parents said no. Instead, they bought him an iPod Touch. He has nearly all the benefits of the cell phone minus the data plan.
o.0 Blind people do not need a rear facing camera when they use an iPod Touch ... think about that for a moment.
iOS is actually very friendly to blind people. My blind friend uses an iPhone.
Maybe I misinterpreted what you meant though.
I don't think the shareholders particularly enjoy watching Apple charge enormous profit margins on low-end consumer products that then sit in banks across the world unspent for years and years.
You and me, both. The original iPhone remains my favorite design.
The iPhone 5 has me really split. I love the silver rim and back, but I hate the white front more than I love the silver back - I'd end up going with black, even though neither one is an ideal choice.
If I could get a white iPhone, and swap out for black glass (whole front and 2 back pieces) I'd be perfectly happy.
-----
On a related-to-the-story note, I have to say that this iPod Touch is fantastic - it's exactly the design I would want in an iPhone - black front, silver back, and no annoying strap-button-thing. Apple's entry-level products should all take this route. I liked that the first approach that the iPad / iPhone / iPod Touch took by making the entry level product the previous generation product, but a stripped-down current generation device is a much, much better alternative.
This is the worst!
This product is just another example of how Apple is relapsing to its Sculley days during Jobs' ousting a million products, a million variations on products, just to fill in price points and sell something, just to make money somehow. What happened to believing in the products Apple is making? Jobs would never have allowed this piece of junk in Apple's lineup! It's not amazing! It's not spectacular! It's not magical! It's just a regression to the original iPod touch, which didn't have a camera on the back! Nobody wants an iPod without a camera; it's absolutely useless! People use their iOS devices for the camera more than half the time!
More than just being an embarrassment to Steve Jobs' carefully nurtured product lineup, this product doesn't even make sense financially. It's missing the camera for goodness' sake!! one of the major selling points for these iPods it's missing the very nifty loop mechanism (which they could have at least included), and to top it all off, it only offers HALF the space of the 32GB model, but it's not even $100 cheaper!
Tim Cook has been a very sore disappointment. We are definitely in the post-Apple era now. I can't wait to see what will emerge to be the next big thing, because I admit that I'm losing my faith in the company that used to change the world.
This product is just another example of how Apple is relapsing to its Sculley days during Jobs' ousting a million products, a million variations on products, just to fill in price points and sell something, just to make money somehow. What happened to believing in the products Apple is making? Jobs would never have allowed this piece of junk in Apple's lineup! It's not amazing! It's not spectacular! It's not magical! It's just a regression to the original iPod touch, which didn't have a camera on the back! Nobody wants an iPod without a camera; it's absolutely useless! People use their iOS devices for the camera more than half the time!
More than just being an embarrassment to Steve Jobs' carefully nurtured product lineup, this product doesn't even make sense financially. It's missing the camera for goodness' sake!! one of the major selling points for these iPods it's missing the very nifty loop mechanism (which they could have at least included), and to top it all off, it only offers HALF the space of the 32GB model, but it's not even $100 cheaper!
Tim Cook has been a very sore disappointment. We are definitely in the post-Apple era now. I can't wait to see what will emerge to be the next big thing, because I admit that I'm losing my faith in the company that used to change the world.