Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPod touch Camera on the Nano, but NO CAMERA on the Touch...

Surely said:
Bolding some of your comment doesn't make your comment more important. It's just annoying.

Adding the new features to the nano (don't forget the slightly larger screen) and not to the Touch will cause iPod customers to think twice before buying a Touch. Apple could sell way more nanos at its price-point than Touches at its price-point.

What I mean by "bringing the nano closer to the same level" is that by adding these premium features to the nano, it brings the nano's perceived value closer to that of the Touch's. It's not just a nano anymore- it's a nano.

As I said, the decision between buying a nano and a Touch just got a little harder to make.

Hell, when I visit the Apple Store, I'll actually go over to the nano and play with one, instead of walking right by and not even noticing it.
Click to expand...


...good point Surely. I agree with most of what you say.

The only thing is that you are not mentioning, is what this could to do the Touch's sales and app store income in general. I agree that the price point is lowered for a Nano. More importantly, Apple on the whole - is looking to make there iPods keep a steady income as their percentages have gone down in 'iPod' sales as of lately.

The perceived value is geared towards the target audience, and that is where I can see your point. Apple would definitely like to increase sales in the 'iPod sector'. Especially, at the price point to target the younger audience they market to...

But, in reality, Apple can do both. They can make the iPod have steady sales with the release of a 'videocamera Nano' and also increase sales of the Touch by having camera/videocamera/mic. So, if I were to make any sense of this in my right mind, I would think that they are gearing towards marketing this feature of camera & video altogether... I guess. :confused:

But, on the other hand, there is a huge Marketing Oppurtunity for Apple to include a camera w/video & a mic on the Touch right now!!! I mean huge! This would be very innovative for Apple to include this because of all the secondhand features this would entice. SDK developers would be going through the roof creating apps for video & pics. It would be a huge source of income for the Touch & app store!

The Touch with a camera w/video & a mic is a flat-out...a huge "want" from an iPod Touch user. Yes, we want 64GB, but a we are searching for the Touch to be even better. We expect better performance in a new update. A camera/videocamera would be a start of a big feature, then may be one day down the road... a GPS. The Touch users were looking for something more...

Apple lead everyone to believe this is the "funnest iPod ever"... Well, I beg to differ now...

I am still searching for the right answer - the only one that I am pondering... is production/development issues...
 
Pipe said:
NO CAMERA, NO VIDEO, NO RADIO...!!! I just can not believe it!! :mad:
Click to expand...

Seriously, how many times are you in a case where a cheaper model of a product has lots of features the more expensive model doesn't?

This is a pretty bad situation.
 
Oh no .....

The iPod Touch has WiFi and the nano doesn't....

They put a cheap camera in the nano that only takes poor quality video as a gimmick to differentiate the nano from the nano clones. People who purchase the new iPod touch should be glad they aren't stuck with the same video camera that's in the nano. Then all the complaints would be "why can't we have the same camera that's in the iPhone and the ability to take still shots."

If a camera and internal mike mean that much to you, get an iPhone.
 
here's a solution, just buy a real camera, which is alot better quality than what the touch would have had...the iPod touch will always be a special iPod, but still just an iPod nonetheless, so you really shouldn't care that your digital multimedia player doesn't have a camera, because it isn't even necessary in the first place, we are seriously just talking cell phone quality at best here. The only thing it would lead to would be an increase in crappy, pointless youtube vids.
 
WordLife565 said:
here's a solution, just buy a real camera, which is alot better quality than what the touch would have had...the iPod touch will always be a special iPod, but still just an iPod nonetheless, so you really shouldn't care that your digital multimedia player doesn't have a camera, because it isn't even necessary in the first place, we are seriously just talking cell phone quality at best here. The only thing it would lead to would be an increase in crappy, pointless youtube vids.
Click to expand...

Video and picture capability added to one already-useful device would be great. Or do you not think so?
 
Beric said:
Seriously, how many times are you in a case where a cheaper model of a product has lots of features the more expensive model doesn't?

This is a pretty bad situation.
Click to expand...

I totally prefer the iPod Touch with camera, video and FM radio with old prices!!
 
Beric said:
Yes, because some people simply wish to spend less money.

Which do you think Apple makes more profit on: a $150 Nano or a $300 Touch? Why wouldn't Apple want people to buy up? And yes Apple decides to leave people in a quandary over whether to spend less money to get a feature they really want.



They popped in a new processor and a new hard drive. That's absolutely it.
Click to expand...

puffnstuff said:
Can the touch make phone calls without wifi?









that one major feature is what distinguishes the two in a major way not a camera,gps,compass,etc.
Click to expand...

BJB Productions said:
I can't tell you how disappointed I am with no camera on the Touch...I am SUPER bummed and WILL NOT be buying the new touch......it would make perfect sense to have a camera on the touch!!!:mad:
Click to expand...

Brb emailing Steve Jobs to make an iPod touch with a cellphone, camera, GPS, UMTS/GSM quad band support (free though god forbid we have to ACTUALLY pay for using AT&T's service), microphone and MMS.....Oh wait....thats the iPhone (That was dripping sarcasm if you didn't pick up on it). Believe me when I say that I'm NOT looking forward to a $80 bill every month for two years but hey that's just the way life is you get what you pay for and your paying for an iPod in the end not a device that is so close to the iPhone apple starts wondering why there selling both. Suck it up and buy an iPhone and stop asking for features that aren't going to happen.

Apple lead everyone to believe this is the "funnest iPod ever"... Well, I beg to differ now...

I am still searching for the right answer - the only one that I am pondering... is production/development issues...
Click to expand...
You can't do half the stuff on a nano (or any ipod for the matter)as you can on the iPod touch. Quit your complaining it IS the funniest iPod ever even if you can't get your little camera.
 
Beric said:
Video and picture capability added to one already-useful device would be great. Or do you not think so?
Click to expand...

Hmm adding a phone would make it even better! They could call it the iPhone!

All this desperate baying for a gimmick is pretty ridiculous. If you want an all-in-one device buy an iPhone. If you can't, get a better cell phone. They all have cameras of equally mediocre quality and you'll have to carry both an iPod and cell anyway if you don't have an iPhone.
 
nateo200 said:
Brb emailing Steve Jobs to make an iPod touch with a cellphone, camera, GPS, UMTS/GSM quad band support (free though god forbid we have to ACTUALLY pay for using AT&T's service), microphone and MMS.....Oh wait....thats the iPhone (That was dripping sarcasm if you didn't pick up on it). Believe me when I say that I'm NOT looking forward to a $80 bill every month for two years but hey that's just the way life is you get what you pay for and your paying for an iPod in the end not a device that is so close to the iPhone apple starts wondering why there selling both. Suck it up and buy an iPhone and stop asking for features that aren't going to happen.
Click to expand...

The appeal to different demographics it wouldn't matter what they add to the touch. The touch appeals to one group the iphone another.

Why can't people understand that?
 
ArcaneDevice said:
Hmm adding a phone would make it even better! They could call it the iPhone!

All this desperate baying for a gimmick is pretty ridiculous. If you want an all-in-one device buy an iPhone. If you can't, get a better cell phone. They all have cameras of equally mediocre quality and you'll have to carry both an iPod and cell anyway if you don't have an iPhone.
Click to expand...

I don't really use my cell phone. It's mainly for emergencies. And isn't Apple pushing for device integration?
 
Kwats said:
Okay I'm seriously tired of seeing everyone on the forum cry like 6 month old babies when there bottle is taken away. So what if there is no camera The new one with a camera would have essentially been an iphone without cellular capabilitys and gps because everyones going to say that too. so i see why they didnt do it. If you don't want one for the spec bump and all you wanted for a camera...that means you were essentially going to spend 300$ on a camera then GO BUY A REGULAR CAMERA! You act like you can't keep ahold of your money tell me really is it such a burdan to have 300$ in your pocket right now?
Click to expand...

I'm not totally depressed about no cameras in the 3rd gen ipod touch, but my cell phone camera is crap, my actual point and shoot is the size of a brick, so I can't just slip that one in my pocket.

Then again, we all agree that the iPod Touch is a chick magnet, so any excuse for girls to take photos of themselves on your own iPod....is good. Especially when your friends play with it next and your photo library makes them jealous. ;)
 
Beric said:
Seriously, how many times are you in a case where a cheaper model of a product has lots of features the more expensive model doesn't?

This is a pretty bad situation.
Click to expand...
It happens in small amounts from time to time (I'm thinking HDD sizes of MacBooks and MacBook Pros some time ago), but not this big of a difference. It makes more sense if we think that the iPod nano and iPod touch are separate products (as opposed to high-end/low-end like the MacBook and MacBook Pro), since the iMac has a camera (and usually has similar/better RAM/HDD) and the Mac Pro doesn't. But even that's far from what we have with the iPods.
 
puffnstuff said:
The appeal to different demographics it wouldn't matter what they add to the touch. The touch appeals to one group the iphone another.

Why can't people understand that?
Click to expand...
Because if it gets to minus one feature between the two it won't matter even more so. Samsung makes phones and an mp3 player but you don't see people bitching about not having a camera and a phone on there mp3 player.
ArcaneDevice said:
Hmm adding a phone would make it even better! They could call it the iPhone!

All this desperate baying for a gimmick is pretty ridiculous. If you want an all-in-one device buy an iPhone. If you can't, get a better cell phone. They all have cameras of equally mediocre quality and you'll have to carry both an iPod and cell anyway if you don't have an iPhone.
Click to expand...
This x11000
 
So soooooo disappointed

I asked everyone for money for my birthday in August knowing a new 64gb ipod touch was being released. Just realised that it won't have a video camera or microphone and I am so disappointed. I won't be buying the new Ipod Touch. I really really hope that this is an error. I did hear rumours that they had trouble with the cameras in the manufacturing stage and set the first thousands aside! So, fingers crossed, they'll hurry up and sort it out in time for Christmas. If I am doubly disappointed at Christmas, I'll buy another brand instead! Steve Jobs, if you read these posts, please mark up one more very disappointed customer on your chart! Can some Apple employee please give us some hope that all will be fine by Christmas? Be good to get a better battery life and an FM radio to boot to like the new Nano! I simply cannot understand why they have upgraded the little Nano so much when the previous fab model has been out for such a long time. Surely the Ipod Touch deserved the same 5* treatment??
 
BUY A FREAKING IPHONE. That's what I'm doing....I mean sure $80+ a month isn't lovely but get a job, work your ass off, give up some things you don't need, ???????????, profit.
 
Guys...

Rewind two years.

The 8gb Touch was $299. The 16gb touch was $399. Holy crap guys. Remember that? The Classic was a mere $249. The iPhone launched at $499 before Apple cut it $200 off. Even $299 was steep for many because WinMo smartphones usually were $299 retail but with at least $100 off because carriers ALWAYS offer discounts (who ever sells at full price anyway?).

The Nano always sat at that 149 and 199 pricepoint with the 3rd gen.

Rewind 1 year now

8gb touch is now $229, 16gb Touch $299.

Why the hell would you get the Nano at this point? $199? Seriously? For $30 more you get a full fledged smartphone minus the phone. You get PC-like capabilities.

Now today.

8gb touch is now $199. The nano maintains its advantage in PRICE. If you want 8gb of storage you can still get it for $149.

The nano is losing its advantage because the touch is so cheap now. The recent buy a mac get an iPod promotions featured the touch only so people are more and more into the touch.

The nano was once just a slimmed down version of the classic, but people don't give a crap anymore. They see no reason to get it. Some people get the iPod Touch simply as a computer/gaming device. I had only 1gb of music on mine and another 1gb of apps. I could care less about the music with the touch. The only way to keep the Nano alive is to make a majorly expensive touch (the 32gb for $299) and keep the cheap one at small capacities.

If you add a camera and what not, the Nano is DEAD. That's why they jumped into product differentiation and introduced new features for the Nano.

You know that's just the way it has to be.

Think of it this way. For so many years now, you've been able to get an iPod for $249, or a nano for $149/$199. The Touch has fallen from $299 to $229 to now $199. This has encroached into the other iPod's space with storage space also growing for the touch. Thus, the only way to keep them apart is product differentiation. You can't give the Touch everything. I would've loved for the touch to have everything. I sold my 1G Touch banking on the 3G Touch getting a camera. Am I sad? Yeah. Can I understand why Apple did things the way they did? Yeah. It makes sense from a business perspective.

To those of you who remember Sony ERicsson introducing their cameraphones. The 2MP K750. Then the new Walkman series. The W810i had everything. Best in class camera, flash, autofocus, and the walkman player. EDGE (no 3G back 2005/2006), etc. Hey, it was great. Then Sony realize dthey had to differentiate. K/C series were cameras. Autofocus for them. W series were Walkman phones. Great music, but toned down cameras. You can't have EVERYTHING.

The same with the Nokia N-series. Nokia fans are craving for a new N95. The N97 they say is years late. Why can't it have Xenon flash, capacitive touch, 8MP camera, etc etc? The N95 was the last "do-it-all" phone and Nokia knows this. It has to separate its N-series so there isn't just 1 phone to do it all.

We're at that point where Apple realizes it HAS to differentiate its products. We can't please everyone. It's a time where we'll be upset, but you have to understand it maeks sense for the business.
 
nateo200 said:
BUY A FREAKING IPHONE. That's what I'm doing....I mean sure $80+ a month isn't lovely but get a job, work your ass off, give up some things you don't need, ???????????, profit.
Click to expand...

So people must spend $80 a month for minutes they will never use because they either do not make a lot of calls or they have another provider they are happy with? :confused:
 
puffnstuff said:
So people must spend $80 a month for minutes they will never use because they either do not make a lot of calls or they have another provider they are happy with? :confused:
Click to expand...

Because whether its a awesome company like apple or not theres always draw backs for sucky reason's that only benefit the company and that's just life....
 
nateo200 said:
Because whether its a awesome company like apple or not theres always draw backs for sucky reason's that only benefit the company and that's just life....
Click to expand...

Yes, but the whole argument that the iPod Touch does not have certain features because it will cannibalize iPhone sales is illogical and not the reason at all so I am tired of people shouting get a phone
 
dmo580 said:
Guys...

Rewind two years.

The 8gb Touch was $299. The 16gb touch was $399. Holy crap guys. Remember that? The Classic was a mere $249. The iPhone launched at $499 before Apple cut it $200 off. Even $299 was steep for many because WinMo smartphones usually were $299 retail but with at least $100 off because carriers ALWAYS offer discounts (who ever sells at full price anyway?).

The Nano always sat at that 149 and 199 pricepoint with the 3rd gen.

Rewind 1 year now

8gb touch is now $229, 16gb Touch $299.

Why the hell would you get the Nano at this point? $199? Seriously? For $30 more you get a full fledged smartphone minus the phone. You get PC-like capabilities.

Now today.

8gb touch is now $199. The nano maintains its advantage in PRICE. If you want 8gb of storage you can still get it for $149.

The nano is losing its advantage because the touch is so cheap now. The recent buy a mac get an iPod promotions featured the touch only so people are more and more into the touch.

The nano was once just a slimmed down version of the classic, but people don't give a crap anymore. They see no reason to get it. Some people get the iPod Touch simply as a computer/gaming device. I had only 1gb of music on mine and another 1gb of apps. I could care less about the music with the touch. The only way to keep the Nano alive is to make a majorly expensive touch (the 32gb for $299) and keep the cheap one at small capacities.

If you add a camera and what not, the Nano is DEAD. That's why they jumped into product differentiation and introduced new features for the Nano.

You know that's just the way it has to be.

Think of it this way. For so many years now, you've been able to get an iPod for $249, or a nano for $149/$199. The Touch has fallen from $299 to $229 to now $199. This has encroached into the other iPod's space with storage space also growing for the touch. Thus, the only way to keep them apart is product differentiation. You can't give the Touch everything. I would've loved for the touch to have everything. I sold my 1G Touch banking on the 3G Touch getting a camera. Am I sad? Yeah. Can I understand why Apple did things the way they did? Yeah. It makes sense from a business perspective.

To those of you who remember Sony ERicsson introducing their cameraphones. The 2MP K750. Then the new Walkman series. The W810i had everything. Best in class camera, flash, autofocus, and the walkman player. EDGE (no 3G back 2005/2006), etc. Hey, it was great. Then Sony realize dthey had to differentiate. K/C series were cameras. Autofocus for them. W series were Walkman phones. Great music, but toned down cameras. You can't have EVERYTHING.

The same with the Nokia N-series. Nokia fans are craving for a new N95. The N97 they say is years late. Why can't it have Xenon flash, capacitive touch, 8MP camera, etc etc? The N95 was the last "do-it-all" phone and Nokia knows this. It has to separate its N-series so there isn't just 1 phone to do it all.

We're at that point where Apple realizes it HAS to differentiate its products. We can't please everyone. It's a time where we'll be upset, but you have to understand it maeks sense for the business.
Click to expand...


well... they lost my money :(

...and when it comes to product differentiation. It is the network that is the difference. The voice/data capabilities being provided by AT&T are key...

Adding a camera w/video & a mic would spark a huge market in itself, then trickle down to more income for the app store.

The other thing is - Apple is a leader & innovator. And, if they do not adopt the iPod Touch to have a camera w/video... they will fall behind. I guarantee it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back