Is a camera really necessary on the iPod Touch?

Discussion in 'iPod touch' started by laravia18, Sep 16, 2009.

  1. laravia18 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2006
    #1
    I feel like a lot of people want a camera and/or camcorder because the iPhone has one. If you are one of those people why do you want a camera and/or camcorder so badly? After they put one on the nano I understand the outrage but the classic doesn't have one and I don't see anyone complaining about that.

    Putting a camera on the device will just further blur the lines between iPhone and iPod Touch. To me it would just be a cheap gimmick to draw in customers instead of improving the device by adding sound and visual quality features and a radio. Making it a better music player should be their main focus.

    Most people have cell phones and out of those people most of them have camera phones. It would just be a camera overload IMO. Agree or disagree what do you think about the iPod Touch not having a camera.
     
  2. Brewerpaul macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Location:
    Clifton Park,NY
    #2
    While it's not the end of the world, I'd like one in my IPT.
    The Touch is so much easier to synch with my desktop PC than my phone is, so I'd be much more likely to take and share pictures with it. The screen on my cell phone is tiny unlike the nice big Touch screen.
    For occasions where I plan on taking photos, I have a decent camera, but for those once in a while unexpected pictures I'd like a camera in my iPod Touch.
     
  3. agkm800 macrumors 6502a

    agkm800

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2009
    #3
    Since I don't want to spend fortune on iPhone with AT&T plan, I'd really want camera on the Touch.

    If you want a great MP3 player and can live without iPhone apps, get Zune HD.
     
  4. netdog macrumors 603

    netdog

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2006
    Location:
    London
  5. Dale Sorel macrumors 6502a

    Dale Sorel

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2003
    #5
    Currently, cameras are for phones. The touch isn't a phone. Therefore, I don't think the touch should have a camera on it.
     
  6. Silencer macrumors member

    Silencer

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    Location:
    London
    #6
    I don't think it will be needed.

    Most of us have cellphones or SLRs. I don't think there will be autofocus on the ipod touch due to its thin sleek body. Also when playing games or as such the camera lens is more likely to get fingerprints on it by accidentely touching it.
     
  7. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #7
    I think there are other features that could have been added, but because they didn't do anything, and people were expecting the camera. They're rather upset.

    To a degree, I agree with them, apple has to continue to innovate and if they don't their competitors will catch up or over take them. They just can't sit there and say they have the market share and relax. The Zune HD is evidence that others are striving to improve their products.
     
  8. tundotcom macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Location:
    NYC
    #8
    I don't see what's the point of rehashing this argument a billion times. You know the arguments for wanting a camera. It's usually either one less device to carry around or that they want something as close to an iPhone as they can get without switching to AT&T.
     
  9. Jimmy James macrumors 68040

    Jimmy James

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    #9
    I really wanted the auto focus camera on the touch. I'll already be carrying a phone and touch, in addition to my wallet and keys. Sometimes, I like to have my basic camera with me and it just becomes to pocket along with those other items. And I don't like carrying stuff!! A decent camera (for a pmp) would frequently make life a little easier.

    That being said; I would much rather have Apple upgrade the sound quality. The ipod line of is badly lacking in this area and they are MUSIC PLAYERS.
     
  10. santos79 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    #10
    :confused:
    Why are cameras for phones?
    You could say the same thing about the Touch's wifi connectivity, e-mail and internet functions as well. It's not just an mp3/video player. I use it mostly as a pocket computer myself (about 80 percent of the time).

    I have a 1st generation Touch myself and I would have very much appreciated the addition of a camera for quick snapshots and vids and to use with the Skype app. But I can wait a year for that.
     
  11. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #11
    For me, it is not a big deal to have a camera on the iPod touch. It would be nice, but it isn't a deal breaker for me. I hardly ever use the camera on my iPhone.
     
  12. Unspoken Demise macrumors 68040

    Unspoken Demise

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Location:
    >9,000
    #12
    Um, the nano isnt a phone.
     
  13. kunal123 macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Location:
    Dehradun,India
    #13
    The only change this year were RAM and processor changes which definitely
    does not warrant a upgrade.
     
  14. oculus42 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2002
    Location:
    Maine
    #14
    It's incorrect to say "Apple didn't do anything." The new iPod Touch sports a faster processor, like the 3GS, which enables useful features like voice control. They also bumped it to 64GB, which means it could be my only iPod, where the 32GB could not.

    No, there's no camera, no compass, no microphone, no FM receiver (the last two were a disappointment after the Nano news). But they did something.
     
  15. Bighaugs Guest

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    #15
    why I want a camera on the iPod touch

    I definitely want a camera on the touch, and I'm holding out 'til it gets one to upgrade from the 8GB 2nd gen.

    Why? I get frustrated when people say things like, "Why not just use the camera on your cell phone?" My wife and I don't have cell phones. The exorbitant cost of the voice+data+messaging plans made that an easy decision.

    The usefulness of the touch as a portable computer made the decision even easier. My wife and I both carry a touch as our portable solutions. Since we spend our days either at a big university (she's an employee; I'm a student) or at home, we're surrounded by ubiquitous wifi. With Skype and the remote-plus-microphone ear buds, who needs a cellular connection for the (relatively infrequent) mobile calls we need to make?

    So, for me, I want a camera for the same reason phone users want a camera: a quick way to take snapshots throughout my day. I think it would be especially useful as a capture tool for GTD. I could take a picture of the whiteboard after a lecture instead of furiously trying to copy down the professor's diagrams. I could instantly capture my hand-written notes in the classes where professors don't allow laptops. The built-in microphone that would likely go with the camera would allow me to easily record lectures for replay later.

    These additions to the touch will make it even easier to get our mobile computing done without locking ourselves into ridiculously expensive two-year contracts.
     
  16. creon macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    #16
    The iPhone and the iPod Touch are the same thing now. I really don't care that the Touch is getting a camera but does it really need it? No, I really think it is just another feature to get more people to buy it. The Touch is 50% faster, yet the talk is all about the camera and not the speed.

    People like change and especially when they can SEE the change.
     
  17. bartzilla macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    #17
    You do realise that cameras are only "for phones" now because once upon a time, back in the days when cameras were "for cameras", someone tried adding one to a phone?
     
  18. santos79 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    #18
    Right. People should really be more appreciative about stuff that they can't see, shouldn't they?

    The thing is that nobody was complaining about the Touch being too slow (even my first generation version is fast enough for my purposes) so it's hard to see that as a real improvement.
    Many were, however, saying that a camera could come in handy. Maybe the speedier CPU is noticeable for games, but I'm positive that more people are interested in having a camera than playing a first-person shooter on a tiny screen with no controls.
     
  19. scotty96LSC macrumors 65816

    scotty96LSC

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
    Location:
    Charlotte, NC
    #19
    I wanted a camera because like some others have said, for those spur of the moment pics. So I was going to go with an iPhone.
    But after seeing the benchmarks for the new iPod touch and the cost of owning an iPhone I'm going to get a new iPod touch and renew my contract with tMobile. Saving $$$ in the long run.
     
  20. iSpaghettiCat macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2009
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    #20
    Riddle me this.

    Is a camera really necessary on the iPhone?
     
  21. crackbookpro macrumors 65816

    crackbookpro

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    Location:
    Om nom nom nom
    #21
    ...some may think I am farfetched, but I made a poll similar to this the other day - http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=786519

    Yes, the camera is a need for Apple. Sure it can be considered to affect iPhone sales, but the true product differentiation is and will always be the network/data part of it. I think the Touch will have a camera after the Nano sales increase... I am guessing sometime after the holidays...

    Adding a camera to the Touch will help Touch sales, and will ultimately generate millions for the app store. Right now, the Touch is and has been doing well in the sales side.

    ...a camera should be coming to the Touch sooner than later - there is money to made, and Apple knows the Market Opportunity is there.

    I think it is coming to the Touch, and it will be after the holidays, unless the Zune HD is killin' it (I doubt it). Then, Apple will release it sooner ;)
     
  22. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #22
    As I mentioned in another thread, a camera in the Touch would be useful not just for taking pictures in the traditional sense, but thanks to various apps in the app store, would provide other functionality as well. For instance, I can take a picture of a paper with writing on it, upload it to Evernote, and their software would convert the writing in the picture image to digital text. In fact, I don't see why an app can't be made to run OCR directly on an iPhone. And if and when such an app becomes available, why shouldn't we be able to use it on the Touch, also?
     
  23. oculus42 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2002
    Location:
    Maine
    #23
    There are a couple of OCR apps out there, already.
     
  24. laravia18 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2006
    #24
    Yes because it is a basic feature that is on even the cheapest of phones. The iPhone would be taken as a joke if it didn't have one especially with the initial price-tag of owning the device.

    I see what you all are saying and well it's true I agree with most of you. It just seemed like so many people thought that without a camera the iPod Touch is crap and would surely die. That is how people were taking the news.
     
  25. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #25
    I don't think anyone was thinking that the Touch is useless w/o a camera. It's still obviously the best media player and mobile internet device out there. It's just that it was so disappointing not to get a camera, internal mic, or other additional features people wanted and/or were expecting.
     

Share This Page