I could see them doing this for the 10th anniversary model or something along those lines.
I loved this design also. Still is my favorite.
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
I could see them doing this for the 10th anniversary model or something along those lines.
I loved this design also. Still is my favorite.
Just Stupid
Why would the camera be removed? Because it's cheaper? Really?
Why would the camera be removed? Because it's cheaper? Really?
Last edited by a moderator:
So the back camera costs $71??
Also seems like that lanyard loop is gone .
BTW, I think a typo on the fully equipped version:
iSight is the face camera, not the back camera.
Also seems like that lanyard loop is gone .
BTW, I think a typo on the fully equipped version:
iSight is the face camera, not the back camera.
lightest ipod touch ever
hmmm surprised they didn't announce this at WWDC and market it as "the lightest ipod ever" (2 grams less than 32gb version)
hmmm surprised they didn't announce this at WWDC and market it as "the lightest ipod ever" (2 grams less than 32gb version)
Because that way they don't care which of their products sell better than and/or cannibalizes the others. The customers choose whatever fits best for them ( or nothing since Apple doesn't offer everything). Apple makes money whatever Apple product selected. So each product is targeted at being best in its category. Apple only has to worry about whether it is the best (or one of the upper 1% ) in the category.
The large enough margin gives them flexibility to make long term calls ( not chase short results for next Quarter or two ).
In contrast, if have loss-leader products in the line up there is always a lingering fear that the vast majority of customers might choose that item at some point. At that point the company's profits and viability go into the crapper.
So if they can make this product at this price, why can't they make a phone with these same specs for not much more? The phone components just don't cost that much. Let's compare.
This model is $229. The iPhone 4 (not even the 4S) costs $450 without a contract.
Time to dump the previous generation stuff and just create a new budget model phone.
This model is $229. The iPhone 4 (not even the 4S) costs $450 without a contract.
Time to dump the previous generation stuff and just create a new budget model phone.
Cant agree more. Thats why I bought an original iPhone on eBay in last October. I use my way to say NO to iPhone5.
The "loop" wrist strap was the reason I didn't buy one. For people who put their iPod Touch in a bumper-style case, the recessed wrist strap connector was just something to get in the way.
It's a shame they couldn't get these down to the $199 price point, as I think that -- psychologically speaking -- $229 is more than a lot of people will spend on a spur of the moment splurge or as a gift.
To the contrary, YES you most certainly can use the ipod touch as a phone! There are so many free VOIP apps where you can send and receive FREE calls on your iPod touch. I do it all the time.
This is such a poor decision on Apple's part.
They should've just discontinued the 4th gen ipod touch when they announced the 5th gen and introduced a 16gb 5th gen with all the same features
Instead they went out of their way to dump the 8gb 4th gen, intro a 16gb version then 8 months later drop it all together and introduce a strip down 16gb 5th gen.
They should've just discontinued the 4th gen ipod touch when they announced the 5th gen and introduced a 16gb 5th gen with all the same features
Instead they went out of their way to dump the 8gb 4th gen, intro a 16gb version then 8 months later drop it all together and introduce a strip down 16gb 5th gen.
Funny because you're commenting on the news about Apple decides on cheaping out and offer a budget product.
I don't think it's a bad move. Instead of a 4th gen model with a smaller screen and slower processor, we have an updated model. The cost is only a bit higher.
Losing the rear camera stinks, but it's good for areas where cameras aren't allowed or where you want to limit camera use. The front-facing camera is still there which is good for FaceTime and self-portraits. I can see this being popular in schools or government institutions. However who knows if their strict regulations would even permit a front-facing camera... although it can easily be covered up or disabled via software.
Also it's a cheaper alternative for developers looking to get a newer device to test on, as long as they don't need the rear camera.
Losing the rear camera stinks, but it's good for areas where cameras aren't allowed or where you want to limit camera use. The front-facing camera is still there which is good for FaceTime and self-portraits. I can see this being popular in schools or government institutions. However who knows if their strict regulations would even permit a front-facing camera... although it can easily be covered up or disabled via software.
Also it's a cheaper alternative for developers looking to get a newer device to test on, as long as they don't need the rear camera.
I'm dying to see how you spin it when Apple does release a stripped down budget model.
And you ignored my point. THIS is a budget model, at least compared to how the iPhones are priced, and compared to the previous version of the Touch. If you want to respond, answer the question - if Apple can make this device at this price, why can't they make a phone with these specs for a bit more (and no, adding the phone hardware doesn't cost an extra $130)?