Ipad vs Itouch, market overlay?

Discussion in 'iPad' started by Dammit Cubs, Apr 10, 2010.

  1. Dammit Cubs macrumors 68000

    Dammit Cubs

    Jul 31, 2007
    Ipad cost you about 499 for the 16gb vs the most expensive itouch is 64gb at $399.

    Do you see people just getting an Ipad vs an expensive iTouch?
  2. barefeats macrumors 65816


    Jul 6, 2000
    Good question. I've been focused on comparing iPad to the iPhone 3GS.

    The screen size and added sensors is the key distinction of the iPad along with the new or improved iPad native apps. You only need to try a few apps on the iPad to see what I mean. Try WeatherBug, NFS: Shift, X-Plane, Contacts, Calendar, and Brushes. And just try running Pages, Numbers, and Keynote on the iPod Touch.

    The iPad is more and better in almost every way. Faster processor. More storage. Faster WiFi (g vs n). Longer lasting battery.

    The main "advantages" of the iPod Touch are that it's smaller and lighter.
  3. Nash Bridges macrumors regular

    Nash Bridges

    Apr 2, 2010
    San Francisco
    The touch is primarily an MP3 player. Don't buy into what anyone else says about it. It is great for that, while the iPad can do the same thing, I can't see running on the treadmill with it.
  4. Dammit Cubs thread starter macrumors 68000

    Dammit Cubs

    Jul 31, 2007
    Lol. Not to apple. According to them .... Itouch is the funnest.

  5. Consultant macrumors G5


    Jun 27, 2007
    Different price range.

    Someone didn't read the app usage data on iPod touch.
  6. FlashHead macrumors regular

    Feb 22, 2010
    The iPod Touch is the funnest. It never leaves my pocket, mostly because I don't have a smartphone (spend half my year abroad, so a locked in contract with AT&T would be a huge waste for me).

    The iPad will give me the 3G coverage I don't have now (even when I go overseas - can get local plan there), let me carry a 1.6 pound device to work every day for note taking and document creation/editing instead of my heavier, over-powered MacBook Pro and replace many of the things I use my iPod Touch for now - just not all the time.

    When I run out to the store, the iPod Touch will still be in my pocket (shopping list, game console while waiting in line), It will still be with me and function as an MP3 player/video player/workout log when I'm at the gym.

    I definitely see both devices fitting very well into my life.
  7. Jinkst macrumors 6502

    Oct 11, 2008
    London via Sydney
    For me personally, I prefer my iPod to hold my entire music library and I use it specifically for it's mp3 playing duties so I never bought an iTouch as they don't have as high capacity as iPod Classics.

    And iPad is alot better for browsing, email etc as the screen is so much more readable. So to me they aren't really comparable in terms of what I want, as I never wanted my iPod to browse, mail etc on the go. That was what my iPhone was for, and still is to an extent when I'm out of the house on leisure.

    However I have had thoughts of "has Apple shot themselves in the foot with iPad?" after the constant tide of "using iPhone after iPad is rough" posts on here and other forums. I feel after everyone's initial insistence on getting as much use as possible out of their iPad things will even out again. I bought an iPad because I wanted one and I can easily afford it, so I don't feel a need to justify what I'll use it for, not like the numerous members posting threads daily about how it fits into their regime.
  8. keyofnight macrumors regular


    Mar 19, 2009
    Seattle, WA, USA.
    I think the overlap is because people were using the iTouch for tasks that are better served by a larger screen.

    It'll be nice to watch movies on the beach (at night) with the iPad. Late night beach movie watching is one of my favorite summer activities! I've tried taking my iPhone and MacBook, and there is usually a (minor) problem. Either the viewing angle doesn't work out well, or the battery won't last long enough, or the screen / speakers are too small, or no one wants to hold the laptop because the damned thing is too hot. iPad would be perfect.

    With that said…I'd much rather tweet on the iPhone than the iPad, I can imagine. Tweeting reminds me of texting (that's what it was designed around, I think); I tweet wherever I am. The iPhone is with me everywhere, it's small, and it seems to go well with the 160 character form-factor. I'm sure it'd be nice to do on the iPad, but I'm sure that iPhone is better for Tweets on the go.

    More examples?—

    PDF reading is nice on the iTouch, but way better on the iPad.
    Word processing, I'm sure, is a better experience on the iPad
    The iTouch/Phone is great for tuning your guitar (I swear!—I don't use a real guitar tuner anymore).
    iPhones are great ad-hoc devices on road trips. Pandora and Last.FM saved my trip, as did the maps. I'd rather have the iPhone in the cup-holder than an iPad sitting on my lap.

    I should shut up since I don't have an iPad yet; I've only played with them at Best Buy. Damn you, Apple—send out the 3G already!
  9. bniu macrumors 6502a

    Mar 21, 2010
    it's conceivable to own both, they both have different uses, though very very few people will own a touch, iphone, and an iPad. (i admit, i briefly owned a touch and an iphone simultaneously, but not anymore).

    my ipad is the perfect computer on the go for me. As great as I like my macbook pro, the thing is TOO dadgum heavy! I see the macbook pro more as a "portable device" as in portable from place to place (i.e., to take with me to china, to put on my desk there). The iPad is more the portable device that I'll carry with me to the bookstore to use, or to the library where I don't need the extra stuff on the macbook pro.

    iPhone serves as the apple machine that fits in my pocket and is perfect for on the go stuff that an ipad is impractical for.
  10. r0k macrumors 68040


    Mar 3, 2008
    We went to dinner last night and I left my iPad at home. When we got to the pizza place, I saw they had free wifi so I whipped out my itouch and came to these very forums. I was able to read and post but I missed the large screen of my iPad. I wonder if the 'touch had higher resolution but was still the same physical size if it would have worked better.
  11. IntelliUser macrumors 6502

    Nov 1, 2009
    Why does it matter?
    It's called "iPod Touch", not "iTouch". Just get over it.
  12. Duffinator macrumors 6502


    Sep 3, 2007
    130 miles NE of Cupertino
    +1. I have both an iPad and Touch. I'll be traveling in a couple of weeks and will take both with me. Watching movies on the Pad will be a lot nicer than using my Touch. While there's plenty of crossover the Pad does many of the functions a lot better and easier than the Touch. Not to mention the WiFi is about 10x faster on the Pad.
  13. hchavarria macrumors 6502

    Oct 8, 2008
    They are not competing products. I don't see myself taking the iPad to gym for some exercise or to the park for a bike ride. iPod is the most portable and if anything is competition to the iPod it's the iPhone and even that targets a different market. I permanently keep an iPod in my car for music and don't plan on trying to fit an iPad to my car.
  14. Fraaaa macrumors 65816


    Mar 22, 2010
    London, UK
    You better get over it too.

    People will always call it how they prefer.

    Even though I'm on your side, I don't even like when people write "Ipad".

    Back to the topic:

    There are netbooks that cost as much as laptops. The price is not a main feature that you should look at, but its purpose. ;)

Share This Page