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.
iPod touch Released
- Thread starter smurfy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I may not be thrilled with the Touch as it currently exists, but that doesn't mean other people can't dig it, right? Apple did well by keeping the HD-based iPod for us storage junkies, and the Touch will progress in time. There's no rule that says a single product has to appeal to everyone, which is why we have what I would say is now a fairly well-rounded family of iPods.
I'm still kind of amazed that the original iPod took off, because 5GB for that kind of money struck me as ridiculous even then. Look how things have progressed, though? Upon reflection I'd say that the iPod line seems to be in pretty good shape at the moment, even if the nano does look like a biscuit.
I'm still kind of amazed that the original iPod took off, because 5GB for that kind of money struck me as ridiculous even then. Look how things have progressed, though? Upon reflection I'd say that the iPod line seems to be in pretty good shape at the moment, even if the nano does look like a biscuit.
The idea that 32 gigs of flash is undoable is complete nonsense, no offense. Ars Technica had an article from March of this year in which they were talking about the possibility of a really thin/small Macbook with flash and how at the time, 32 gigs of flash was around $160. $160/2 = $80. Assuming that there is a discount the higher the volume, then let's say 16 gigs is $90. That is still pretty cheap. No, the thing that is hitting people's wallets here is the touchscreen plus all the unnecessary PDA functions. And yes, they are unnecessary. It's an iPod, not a PDA but it looks like Apple is turning it into a PDA. The thing is loaded with PDA features, but lacks the thing needed for a media player: storage capacity.
Apple could have gone with 32 gig and 16 gig players, but one of the reasons they didn't is to avoid killing the iPhone off so soon. If they released 16 and 32 gig iPods with the same features as the iPhone, then suddenly a top of the line iPhone has half the storage of the low-end iPod and a quarter of the high-end iPod. Assuming 16 gigs is $80-90, then that tells you how much of a mark-up Apple is charging over the actual production costs with a $400 pricetag. Oh well though, eventually the prices will come down just like with the hard drive based iPods and Apple will work out the kinks. Hopefully within a year or two, we'll have a mature iPod Touch with at least 80 gigs of storage.
Apple could have gone with 32 gig and 16 gig players, but one of the reasons they didn't is to avoid killing the iPhone off so soon. If they released 16 and 32 gig iPods with the same features as the iPhone, then suddenly a top of the line iPhone has half the storage of the low-end iPod and a quarter of the high-end iPod. Assuming 16 gigs is $80-90, then that tells you how much of a mark-up Apple is charging over the actual production costs with a $400 pricetag. Oh well though, eventually the prices will come down just like with the hard drive based iPods and Apple will work out the kinks. Hopefully within a year or two, we'll have a mature iPod Touch with at least 80 gigs of storage.
Comparing Nano to touch, they're valuing the display and WiFi at about $100. Comparing touch to touch, they're valuing the Flash at about $100 per 8GB (which is consistent with the $50 bump from 4GB to 8GB in the Nano). I don't know where Ars got their numbers, but you can't look at the parts cost so much as the burdened cost.
The numbers also don't scale linearly with capacity-- you have to look at chip count (the package isn't free) and the technology premium for using the latest parts. Then, once you've got more than a couple parts hanging off the memory bus things start to get complicated in meeting the bus timings, not to mention the yield penalty you pay for each additional part and pin. One bad solder joint can drastically increase the cost of manufacture on a unit, if not scrap it entirely. More joints, more opportunities for trouble.
I've been assuming there are only two flash chips in these things for the reasons above, but Samsung's site shows 32Gbit as the highest capacity so there may be 4 in there. 8 is getting downright unwieldy.
this can actually make a dent in my loyalty towards palm in future revisions. I mean, this +applications +GPS == the PDA I would buy with no thinking...
It does
Well, the difference is that in a device like the MacBook, Apple could use several cheap flash-chips to reach the desired capacity. They do not have that luxury with device like the iPod, so they have to use 1-2 large-capacity Flash-chips instead, and those carry a price-premium.
IIRC, the biggest Flash-chips today store 8GB. So the two touch-models come with one or two of those chips. If they wanted more storage, they would have to start adding more chips to it. And they probably simply do not have the space for it.
No, not really. The size of the device limits them to 2 Flash-chips at most. And with current tech that means capacities of.... you guessed it: 8 or 16GB. In a laptop they do not have such drastic limitations, so they can just pile those chips in.
This isn't about killing iPhone, since by your logic the iPhone could just as easily ship with 16 or 32GB of Flash.
I still don't see why people need all their music with them at once? Someone made a good point about how one should get a MacBook if that's what they want to do. The odd movie, TV show or podcast, plus too much music for a month, means that unless you never sync or connect your ipod to a computer, you'll be fine...
granted, I haven't used iPhone, but.... If those volume-buttons work the same way as they do on other phones, they are meant for lowering the volume of the internal speaker. That way when you answer the call, you can adjust the volume of the call without taking the phone off your ear. Since Touch does not have a phone, that feature is not needed.
That is my only concern at this point.
To be honest I'm glad they kept the 'classic' and beefed the storage. I like the current iPod, and I want an iPhone. I also don't want to look like a fool with two touch screen devices that look the same barring the exception of chrome.
160GB Classic for the win.
I do hope the iPhone gets that nice matte finish when it comes out here though
160GB Classic for the win.
I do hope the iPhone gets that nice matte finish when it comes out here though
To be honest I'm glad they kept the 'classic' and beefed the storage. I like the current iPod, and I want an iPhone. I also don't want to look like a fool with two touch screen devices that look the same barring the exception of chrome.
160GB Classic for the win.
I do hope the iPhone gets that nice matte finish when it comes out here though
thts exactly my view aswell. the touch ipod doesnt quite appeal 2 me cauz of lack of HD space. i love the wireless option tho
.the ipod classic is just that, its classic and therefore not supposed to be looking anything different to the older ipod 4th and 5th gen. i like the look of them and will most likely buy it as my next ipod.
agreed. What I don't understand with a good majority of the comments on this forum is they are trying to align the iPod touch to the tradition iPod collection..... its a new product its not the iPod in its tradition functionality or how we know it.... we are in a production transition phase to a touch interface..... if Apple abandoned the click-wheel for touch we would all cry out... if Apple were Microsoft they would release touch with 2GB of flash and 40GB hard drive which would compromise performance and freeze up more times than we'd like..... the iPod touch is not an iPod... its an internet device for streaming content... youTube, web, radio etc. this is the future... storing files on local hard-drives is not the way we are heading... ask any 16 year old... where are there photos ? on their iPod ? NO there on Facebook iBucket, Flkr etc. - how do they communicate ? via hotmail, gmail etc. ? no through social networking websites and the like...... the iPod touch is so far ahead of its time its not funny but its not an iPod in the traditional sense of the word – storing music files etc. – it’s a lifestyle device. If you are a DJ and need to bring your 100GB of music with you and video and steaming is not a big thing then the classic is for you..... the touch is for the new generation of people not for iPod users of today....... I wonder if PSP users complain that they can't download all 150 games to their PSP unit ?
iPod touch is not for current iPod users... if for new users with no iPod....... Apple now have every base covered.... you'll note at the keynote that iPod sales are now represented by cumulative sales of all iPods not each individual model.....
To be honest I'm glad they kept the 'classic' and beefed the storage. I like the current iPod, and I want an iPhone. I also don't want to look like a fool with two touch screen devices that look the same barring the exception of chrome.
160GB Classic for the win.
I do hope the iPhone gets that nice matte finish when it comes out here though
Ditto. It's better to just get an iPhone, especially now with the price cut and 3G rumors. Am gonna get the Silver 80GB, which is a nice 50GB boost to my current 30GB and will allow me storage as external backup solution for files whilst the iPhone caters to my touch/new phone needs.
19 more days....Sept 25, Apple Expo should see the European related iPhone announcements
Just to reinforce your message a bit, this is really an issue of timing. I get more than a few trade magazines of the electronic design bent and what people need to know is that the technology to make larger capacity iPods is just around the corner. In a very literal sense. I would expect that Apple could rev these and keep similar price points by January or February. The technology is close at hand but not ready for the massive quantities Apple needs to ship.
I know there are a lot of people on the board complaining about the storage space on the iPod Touch, they really just need to chill. When the technology is there I'm certain this unit will ship with much more storage space.
In any event somebody mentioned a few posts ago that these thing are going to sell like hotcakes. Let me tell you I agree 100%. It won't be just for consumers either as I can see commercial and industrial uses for RF based Browsers that are this cheap. Think about it folks $299 to get you on the net intra or inter. Any factory that has transitioned to web based tools will have a use for these.
Now my question is does this thing have disk mode? That would be icing on the cake so to speak.
Dave
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/sdk/ipod-touch-runs-same-applications-as-iphone-296837.php
You may be asking yourself where is Mail, Weather, Google Maps or Stocks in the new iPod touch. The answer: they are coming, but probably not from Apple. The iPod runs Mac OS X like the iPhone does and we have got unofficial word from inside Apple that it runs exactly the same applications. The exact quote: "they use the same damn binaries." When this gets confirmed by the usual suspects, expect to see them in the touch in no time, along with all the independent software
You may be asking yourself where is Mail, Weather, Google Maps or Stocks in the new iPod touch. The answer: they are coming, but probably not from Apple. The iPod runs Mac OS X like the iPhone does and we have got unofficial word from inside Apple that it runs exactly the same applications. The exact quote: "they use the same damn binaries." When this gets confirmed by the usual suspects, expect to see them in the touch in no time, along with all the independent software
3rd Party
Actually, all the excuses SJ gave for not allowing 3rd party app development for the iPhone DO NOT APPLY to allowing 3rd party apps on the iPod. There is no "phone" to break, it is not critical that my iPod never crash, etc.
There is no reason whatsoever that Apple should not open the iPod touch to 3rd party development. Other than having to somehow prevent those apps from running also on the iPhone in some lame way. However, I predict there will be a dev kit released at the next WWDC.
assuming it runs the same OS X version as on the iPhone, we may be seeing lots of hacking and 3rd party apps. I'm hoping.
Actually, all the excuses SJ gave for not allowing 3rd party app development for the iPhone DO NOT APPLY to allowing 3rd party apps on the iPod. There is no "phone" to break, it is not critical that my iPod never crash, etc.
There is no reason whatsoever that Apple should not open the iPod touch to 3rd party development. Other than having to somehow prevent those apps from running also on the iPhone in some lame way. However, I predict there will be a dev kit released at the next WWDC.
How as that a "review"? Please don't try to force page views with crap like that...
itd be useful to be anywhere in your house, and be able to download songs from your itunes library located on your stationary mac or lappy over the air via your WiFi netowork, or stream songs over the network like airport extreme.
How did they miss such a useful feature?
so you can only sync your iPT via a dock/usb cable?
First off the touch screen is exactly what many people here want. The good part is that Apple is offering alternatives.
As to the Flash issue you need to realize that Apple is shipping huge volumes and needs flash that is shippable. The higher capacity flash isn't ready yet. That doesn't mean that higher capacity "Touch's" won't ship soon, but I don't expect the supply demand equation to balance before the end of the year. At that time Apple will upgrade the "Touch" and every little wennie on this board will whine about how Apple screwed them. Sad but true.
As to the PDA functions; I suspect that the unit has enough compatibility with the iPhone that these features cost them nothing. Besides there are not that many PDA functions being shown. Hopefully Apple will be more open with this unit as I could see lots of uses for the unit with custom apps installed.
Really can we stop whine now!!! The PDA functions likely have zip in the way of impact on the units price. If you don't like them then uninstall them.
Ignorance. The iPhone is a Cell phone this device is not going to kill it off, it isn't even in the market.
The unit will go to the larger flash sizes as soon as supply can meet Apple's market demands. I suspect that that market demand will be very strong as this is a compelling little machine.
I suspect that Apple will be able to double the storage sizes for the different models by around the beginning of next year. By that time the suppliers of flash should have there production lines up and running for the latest variants. That is running at a volume that Apple demands.
One has to realize that Apple is consuming a good portion of the world total flash production capacity already. This device will likely cause an even greater proportion of flash production to flow into Apple's production pipes.
Dave