More Details on Next iPod Touch and Nano

[Bodypainter]

My predictions:
iPod Classic and Shuffle are gone.

yes, that would make sense.

32gb & 64gb 4th gen Touch with 2 cameras, Retina display, etc. come it at $229 and $299.

the touch was always lacking features that the iphone has, it was apples way to keep people buying iphones to get all the features.

retina display makes sense, as it will be a standard for all developers in the future. but 2 cameras is too much for one generation-step. remember that the touch doesn't even have ONE camera at the moment. so why should they add two now?

but they will add 1, because the nano doesn't have a camera now. the touch is going to be the new competitor to the flip and it will be able to edit with imovie right on the device and also upload it via wifi. flip can not do this!

The new square Nano starts at $79 for 8/16gb and $99 for 16/32gb.

way too cheap! people are already used to the prices and apple rarely changes the price categories. a nano for under 99 us$ is stupid as they wouldn't make enough profit. and 99 us$ for a 32 gb version? that would destroy the pricepoint of the touch...

A new 7" iPad Mini/iPod Touch XL debuts at $349, $449 and $549 for 16/32/64gb.

they'd have to add facetime capabilities to the ipad 2nd gen before they introduce the touch xl because otherwise these products would be too similar. it would also confuse the people if apple introduces too many products at once (nano, touch, apple tv, touch xl). apple wants their customers to buy one of the new products, even if you already have a nano, shuffle or touch. they know that you will buy probably only one product, so they will try to avoid you to get into a "buying conflict". you will order the nano or the new touch and in 2 months they'll show the new apple tv. and then you'll probably also get weak and order it, because it's only 99 us$ ... ;-)

The new iTV is released with the $99 pricepoint, but there will also be an iTV app for the 2 most current iPhones/Touch that allows you to dock them to your TV for a iTV experience. Will require iOS 4.1 which is also released at this event.

the question is: what is the iTV experience? that you choose everything on the ipad/ipod touch and the tv screen is blank until the video appears and then you look at the videoscreen and switch off the touch or leave it on until the battery is drained? i can't believe that. the apple remote is the key to the apple tv. the problem is the user interface, they have to solve this. also they have to start using the internet or wifi via the mac to get the content rather than storing everything onto a harddisk.

if there is an app, the app itself will be apple tv/itv, not the remote control. also frontrow can turn into apple tv/itv. the key feature is a video-store to rent out videos. they will try to make money in this business as they also made money with apps. and who knows - maybe you'll even get iAds too?

 

[absynth]

What if



3x3 touchscreen in place and nano stays widescreen. Yes. Maybe..

i think you forgot the whole point of the shuffle: no screen means you shuffle
likewise you also forgot the whole point of the nano: as small as possible

shuffle is exit. with the diminishing sales of the iPod apple wants to trim down the product line and now with the touchscreen becoming more and more affordable it becomes both technically and economically feasible to make a "nano touch" that's almost as small as the 2nd generation shuffle.

 

[powers74]

yeah

There is when you are trying to sell people on the new iPod touch which will have even better video features. I suspect the video features of the nano were incredibly underused, and it just added to the cost of production which Apple doesn't like.

That makes sense. Eliminating the wide screen still seems like a strange move though. Nano was a pretty full featured little device by this last revision.

 

[absynth]

What if



3x3 touchscreen in place and nano stays widescreen. Yes. Maybe..

i think you forgot the whole point of the shuffle: no screen means you shuffle
likewise you also forgot the whole point of the nano: as small as possible

shuffle is exit. with the diminishing sales of the iPod apple wants to trim down the product line and now with the touchscreen becoming more and more affordable it becomes both technically and economically feasible to make a "nano touch" that's almost as small as the 2nd generation shuffle.

ironically, in your line-up, it's the ipod nano that will be the product missing.

 

[Bodypainter]

You predict no facetime front camera but your set on a real camera? Are you just pulling these predictions out of thin air? we have already seen the front faces of the ipod touch and it has a whole identical in size to the iphone's facetime camera, however, you say that it WILL have a rear camera but we have seen little to no evidence supporting that other than hearsay... okay. If it gets a camera at all, which i think it will, it will be facetime way before a rear facing camera. the VGA camera for facetime costs $1 and encourages their push to creating an open standard for video calling. additionally, it gives iphone 4 users someone to actually facetime with.

how much does a microphone cost? 0,50 us$? and still it is not built in - even after 3 generations of touchs! apple could afford it, but doesn't want it. they want the touch NOT to be a too great competitor for the iphone.

the real camera for the touch is a necessary and logical step as the nano doesn't have a camera anymore and apple still wants to compete with the flip/youtube filmer market.

apples way of thinking is always a bit bad and often against our wishes. it's not what the user wants that you get, there is always a psychological strategy behind the features of a product and how the products are linked to each other.

for example: why did apple remove the firewire port on the mac book? so that you are forced to buy a mac book pro.

or: why did apple only have a way too small 21 inch imac and a super large 27 inch imac? so that you buy the larger one because the small one is too small.

or: why does the entry level ipod touch only have 8 gb and the next model has 32? (where is the 16 gb touch?) they want you to buy the next one.

in the past they did the same game with the cd-drives on the mac mini or the mac book. the entry level machine only had a cd drive, no burner! no other machine on the market had a cd-only drive anymore, but apple used it to force people to buy the next higher machine. i still ask myself where apple got all those cd-drives from, as the market already moved to cd burners at that time. they probably were even more expensive than the better cd burners!


is thinking in target markets, not in what the user wants or what is technically possible.

 

[ChrisGonzales90]

The new iPod Touch is going to tempting, even though I'd really like to get an iPad when they start selling it here. (and I really don't see a reason to get them both)

Because the ipad cant fit in your pocket?

So you want a simi slow touch? I think you misunderstood "ram" for Hard drive space. The Touch may very well reach 128GB. if not this year, next - if SSD prices go down.

as for ram. I'm thinking it could have 512MB. Next year the 1GHZ.

The classic may stick around as many just want a music player. they dont want wifi or apps. Plus those same people have large libaries and want them with them at all times.



Yeah. I created that topic

but 2011 will mark 10 years since the orgnail ipod.



I think its pretty obvious. But 16GB? I think if your statement were to come true it will be 32GB, 64GB and 128Gb.
And again, its not ram, but storage.



So what did jobs mean by “we will sell tens of millions of facetime devices this year”. The touch is pretty much the iphone, but with out the phone. It can handle facetime just fine. (but since its an “open indristy standard” we could see desktop clients adapt the use of it and we could connect to programs such as WLM and ichat



So pretty much a new shuffle then? Why go thoughn all the trouble of adding video and a camcorder to throw it all out?



16Gb and 32GB this round. Dock connecter will stay




Like I said. You just described the new shuffle.



Or they can start using STDs


Doesn’t force anyone. Those who don’t want apps and such will just buy another brand.



So you can get a 160GB touch then? There wont be 3 resolutions.

 

[Brien]

If that square thing is the nano, goodbye shuffle.

 

[ChrisGonzales90]

If that square thing is the nano, goodbye shuffle.

Then why go though the trouble to add all those features?

No one knows yet kid. We will see next week.

 

[cgc]

Apple should call the square iPod Nano the Bizarro Nano (in honor of Bizarro-World and Bizarro-Superman).

I'm buying the iPod Touch no matter what they do to it...been waiting a while to replace my 1st Gen Nano.

 

[absynth]

as a follow-up to my previous post, i really dont see the need for the ipod nano the way it is now anymore

if you want a highly portable dedicated music player: the ipod nano "touch"
i.e. the athlete
if you want your whole library on the go: the ipod classic
i.e. the music freak
if for some reason you already have a phone: the ipod touch
i.e. AT&T haters? i have no idea why one wouldnt want an all in one device, seems to me to be an american thing (VERIZON / Sprint fans). I hardly if ever see an ipod touch out here in the wild in Europe versus the multitude of iphones.

 

[Bodypainter]

I still say that doesn't look like a touchscreen, you rarely see those horizontal lines in modern LCD/LED screens. You do see them in modern solar cells!
I remember seeing something on here a year and a half ago about how apple filed a patent to have iPods that were dual powered by traditional ac power and a solar cell on the back.

yes, these lines are not really looking like a display. but if it was a solar cell it would only be a stupid gimmick and most of the time you'd have to carry the weight of the solar cells without using them.

that doesn't sound like apple ;-)

also apple rarely does special things. for example: wouldn't it be logical to make a waterproof ipod shuffle? it would. but it won't happen. and such solar panel would also not happen because it is too inefficient.

 

[powers74]

+1

once again, if there is a tiny square touchscreen iPod coming, it is a brand NEW product... iPod Watch, iWatch, or iFaceTime. just my wild guess. that is all.

If Apple made a watch, that just might get me to wear one. And Apple is on a serious mission from the future - the iPad is the first part of that, along with hiring that wearable tech guy. I wouldn't be shocked one bit if it was a watch.

Edit - also that "Big new product" quote would fit.

 

[Bodypainter]

well done! and as you can see the nano is now really nano and very close to the shuffle. therefore i think apple will erase the shuffle completely. if someone wants a shuffle then buy the nano and don't use the display! if you use the remote control on the nano (that works like the one of the shuffle) and but the nano in your pocket (or clip it onto your shirt) you won't even "feel" a difference!

the shuffle was invented in a time where ipods were expensive and heavy. my first shuffle with 512 kb cost 149 us$ but that was still ok compared to the 249 us$ the ipod mini would have cost. you could shake the shuffle wherelse the ipod mini had a harddisk. at that time the shuffle was important for the product line. if the nano is nearly as small as the shuffle it really makes no sense at all.

 

[Bodypainter]

i admit that it looks a bit like a wide dock connector, but still there is something weird about this picture: where is the headphone jack???

 

[Bodypainter]

You predict no facetime front camera but your set on a real camera? Are you just pulling these predictions out of thin air? we have already seen the front faces of the ipod touch and it has a whole identical in size to the iphone's facetime camera, however, you say that it WILL have a rear camera but we have seen little to no evidence supporting that other than hearsay... okay. If it gets a camera at all, which i think it will, it will be facetime way before a rear facing camera. the VGA camera for facetime costs $1 and encourages their push to creating an open standard for video calling. additionally, it gives iphone 4 users someone to actually facetime with.

how much does a microphone cost? 0,50 us$? and still it is not built in - even after 3 generations of touchs! apple could afford it, but doesn't want it. they want the touch NOT to be a too great competitor for the iphone.

the real camera for the touch is a necessary and logical step as the nano doesn't have a camera anymore and apple still wants to compete with the flip/youtube filmer market.

apples way of thinking is always a bit bad and often against our wishes. it's not what the user wants that you get, there is always a psychological strategy behind the features of a product and how the products are linked to each other.

for example: why did apple remove the firewire port on the mac book? so that you are forced to buy a mac book pro.

or: why did apple only have a way too small 21 inch imac and a super large 27 inch imac? so that you buy the larger one because the small one is too small.

or: why does the entry level ipod touch only have 8 gb and the next model has 32? (where is the 16 gb touch?) they want you to buy the next one.

in the past they did the same game with the cd-drives on the mac mini or the mac book. the entry level machine only had a cd drive, no burner! no other machine on the market had a cd-only drive anymore, but apple used it to force people to buy the next higher machine. i still ask myself where apple got all those cd-drives from, as the market already moved to cd burners at that time. they probably were even more expensive than the better cd burners!


is thinking in target markets, not in what the user wants or what is technically possible.

 

[skeep5]

Five Days!

 

[macuser1994]

Is this what apple is thinking ?

I don't see the shuffle leaving the line anytime soon, lots of people who run or do sport etc use them i think the pics is what these people want

I see apple creating a watch type shuffle that straps on your wrist and splits in two revealing the dock connector (yes i know they will not but i like it)

A wide range of colors available just like the current nano

Now the head phone problem well i think apple would release a new type of wireless headphones for this device via blue tooth as seen in the pic a blue tooth symbol

any good ?

 

[skeep5]

I don't see the shuffle leaving the line anytime soon, lots of people who run or do sport etc use them i think the pics is what these people want

I see apple creating a watch type shuffle that straps on your wrist and splits in two revealing the dock connector (yes i know they will not but i like it)

A wide range of colors available just like the current nano

Now the head phone problem well i think apple would release a new type of wireless headphones for this device via blue tooth as seen in the pic a blue tooth symbol

any good ?

Did you design that? pretty cool

 

[madmaxmedia]

That makes sense. Eliminating the wide screen still seems like a strange move though. Nano was a pretty full featured little device by this last revision.

But the new iPod Touch really supercedes the old Nano design I think- better camera and video, better screen, FaceTime, etc...The sizes are different, but not that much- both are very pocketable.

So I think Apple sees most target customers for the old Nano to buy the new iPod Touch instead. This would make the most sense if the new $199 or $229 iPod Touch is actually a 4G w/ camera and not older 3G design, as then the price points are pretty close. If you were thinking about buying a $149 older Nano, now you can spend a bit more and get a much better multimedia experience. Let's hope this is the case!

The other aspect that favors a $199/$229 4G iPod Touch is that Apple usually spreads its price points pretty well. The new touchscreen Nano is going to be cheaper than the old one, so Apple needs to fill that middle price point somehow. Maybe there will be a $149 or $179 8GB iPod Touch 3G. So then $199/$229 for iPod Touch 4G 16GB, etc.

The new Nano is for those who would buy a Shuffle, or for old Nano buyers who really didn't watch much video anyway, and just wanted a screen for navigation. Now finally Apple's cheapest music player has a screen, and does it in a way that is not 'me too', i.e. a glorified Apple Sansa Clip.

 

[macuser1994]

Did you design that? pretty cool

I had this idea a while before the 3g ipod shuffle so i decided to give my design a shot with some help from a friend who is really good with 3d image work etc

 

[thirteen1031]

I remember having my iPod Classic 100% full of music, and it was a nightmare finding what i wanted to play, added 10 minutes to my journey. I now use playlists and my Nano, although my girl friend's Shuffle is really quick an easy to use, probably even better for short journeys!

I'm guessing (and in agreement with others) that they'll drop the shuffle. Earbuds with the tiny controls on the wire are common now (play, pause, fast-forward/back), so no need to get a shuffle for that perk. Move the shuffle's voice commands to the Nano and it's golden. The jogger need never look at a screen to go to a playlist, artist, album. To shuffle or pause or jump over a song.

It does look like, at this point, that Apple would do better by shrinking down it's product line: Nano, Touch, iPhone and iPad. At this point, the Nano, if thin and small and cheap enough, can consolidates Shuffle/Nano, the Touch, if it has a large enough hard drive option, can consolidates Classic/Touch.

 

[AmpSkillz]

It seems like an obvious move

if the iPod Classic is gone why not get a new 128gb iPod Touch instead?..

if the iPod Nano (as we know it) is gone, you should just get a cheap 16gb iPod Touch with the widescreen and video that you are already hooked on now

anyone left over either cant afford or just doesn't want to pay for an iPod touch or just wants a tiny music player, and the new whatever its called iPod (iPod Touch Mini?) will satisfy both of them

I have wondered for months how they would cut the fat and reduce their own market cannibalization

 

[jamesryanbell]

I had this idea a while before the 3g ipod shuffle so i decided to give my design a shot with some help from a friend who is really good with 3d image work etc

That is LEGIT. I love it.

 

[buxtone17]

i.e. AT&T haters? i have no idea why one wouldnt want an all in one device, seems to me to be an american thing (VERIZON / Sprint fans). I hardly if ever see an ipod touch out here in the wild in Europe versus the multitude of iphones.

I love how anyone who buys a touch instead of an iPhone is automatically an "AT&T hater". And since you're calling out Verizon and Sprint "fans" are you saying that the Droid line and the EVO can't be considered "all in one" devices?

Perhaps you don't have this problem in Europe, but the iPhone is essentially useless in some parts of the States, where AT&T's infrastructure is miserable at best.

For those of us that live in those parts of the country, why spend $200 on the phone and $1300 on the plan (and that's just for 450 minutes, 200 MB per month and no texting) when the phone isn't even going to work as it's supposed to? Example? Most of my iPhone-owning friends simply can't receive calls in certain parts of town and don't receive texts or voicemails until hours after they're sent.

I would love to have an iPhone, but considering the cost and the fact that AT&T doesn't support my area at this point, it's just not practical.

Also, the touch is huge for teenagers whose parents won't let them have an iPhone. Or for people who just don't see the need to spend money on a data plan, but are still interested in apps and video.

 

[madmaxmedia]

I have wondered for months how they would cut the fat and reduce their own market cannibalization

Apple has always had one of the tightest product line-ups around, whether it be computers, iPods, or phones. You can't completely consolidate the entire iPod line, there's no point when there are different types of players for different customer types. You don't want too many models, but there's very little fat in Apple's lineup.

For some reason people really want Apple to drop the Classic, even though you can't get nearly that much storage space with a solid state player at even double the price. There's no need to force the exit of the Classic, Apple will drop it when sales are too low. Until then, it is a good margin product that requires very little Apple design resources (since the design has been essential frozen for a few years.)

There is a basis now for consolidating Shuffle and Nano, but only because a few market forces have conspired to do so- increasing iOS popularity, addition of camera to next iPod, (likely) poor reception of last Shuffle, etc.