I wonder,would you buy an ipod touch,if apple release the 160gb this september?..because,i will certanly buy it..no doubt..my ipod classic couldn't play song throught bluetooth and doesn't has built in speaker..
Nope. I am done with iPods after the iPhone came out.
I have ipod classic, ipod touch and iphone..but i still waiting for bigger capacity of ipod touch..because i already tried to search a thousand songs from both ipod..the touch screen's way is better and easier..have you try it?..you will love to..I'd probably pick up an iPod if they sold one I like, but I can't stand the touch screen, so definitely not a 160gb iPod touch. An iPod Nano with a scroll wheel, modern tech, and some size to it - now that's a contender.
Yes..you prefer iphone..the way i see it,you're not music fanatic are you?..![]()
I would have to say no. It's so easy now just to stream music from the cloud for me it doesn't make since to pay for that amount of storage anymore
Plus I still have a classic iPod that I use in my jeep
What nonsense. An iPhone plays music just as well as an iPod Touch, but it can do a lot more. Like making phone calls, and satellite navigation. There would be few people willing to pay a lot of money for a 160 GB iPod Touch, and not willing to spend a little bit more to get an iPhone.
There's a market for the Classic. It's a very specialised device, and some people want that. There's no market for an iPod Touch with huge, expensive storage.
Yes..you prefer iphone..the way i see it,you're not music fanatic are you?..![]()
These areas are practically non-existant in my country, and in any case, even if I was out of a covered area, I would still have the remaining music on my iPhone.You need internet connection or hot spot to stream music..what if when you're in no signal area?
Only 50gb?..i'm not sure...because you're audiophile lover (so am i),let's say all your music file is apple lossless audio file (ALAC)..average,one song's duration is 4 minutes..that is about 25mb..cmiiw..so,you can only fill 2000 songs?..that's absolutely not enough..I really don't see what my audiophile feelings has to do with choosing an iPhone over an iPod? I can deal with having access to only 50Gb on a day to day basis.
Like i said,you only have 2000 songs..that's not enough..[/QUOTE]These areas are practically non-existant in my country, and in any case, even if I was out of a covered area, I would still have the remaining music on my iPhone.
They can release a 256gb oneand still I would not come near it. I don't get it, why not get an iPhone, instead.
They can release a 256gb oneand still I would not come near it. I don't get it, why not get an iPhone, instead.
Well, a phone is a phone..not a portable music player..when i enjoy my music library,i don't want to disturbed by incoming message and phone call..plus,i don't want to waste my cellphone battery life,just because of i hear music..come on,guys..you know what i'm talking about..let's don't screw the art of enjoying music..
Price. Add your data cost with the iPhone cost and tell me what you are paying over a 2 year period![]()
I don't know $250 a month let me know.
I'd buy the 160GB nano. Having an iPod touch just feels weird in addition to having a beast smartphone that does everything. (I use the experience of having multiple smartphones that are no longer connected to a cellular network ... I just don't see the use of carrying more than one phone with me.)I'd probably pick up an iPod if they sold one I like, but I can't stand the touch screen, so definitely not a 160gb iPod touch. An iPod Nano with a scroll wheel, modern tech, and some size to it - now that's a contender.
That's my point. I'm still not sure why people say that the cost difference between an iPhone and Touch is not much. Just add together the cost of the iPhone (subsidized or not) along with two years of a cell plan. You can buy multiple Touch for what you pay for an iPhone over two years. Granted, the iPhone does more but, for myself and many other people, the cost is not worth it.
I also wouldn't buy any device with more than 64GB.
That's my point. I'm still not sure why people say that the cost difference between an iPhone and Touch is not much. Just add together the cost of the iPhone (subsidized or not) along with two years of a cell plan. You can buy multiple Touch for what you pay for an iPhone over two years. Granted, the iPhone does more but, for myself and many other people, the cost is not worth it.
I also wouldn't buy any device with more than 64GB.