Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Prototype 3rd Gen iPod Touches with Camera Appear on eBay

rdlink said:
Except that a 32GB iPhone without a contract costs $700, and a 64GB iPod Touch costs $399. Some of us will NEVER buy an iPhone as long as AT&T has exclusivity rights.
Click to expand...

Yes the total cost is overlooked by many people.Lots of people get a touch and a go phone or other cheap "dumb"phone to save a lot of money.Many others live where they can't get a good signal from ATT,or ATT at all.Then there are people who just don't like ATT for whatever reason.I'm sure they wouldn't mind if the touch had a camera.
And then there's the unanswered question:What would be so bad if the touch DID take a few sales from the phone?After all,they are both Apple high margin products.
The only loser I see in that situation is ATT.
But I don't accept the premise that the two products compete to any great extent anyway.
 
E.Lizardo said:
I guess my sarcasm wasn't "obvious"enough.Hint:The entire last sentence was the opposite of what I believe.
It's pretty clear from rumors,leaked cases,and these prototypes,and,yes,the teardowns of the current device that a camera was considered and rejected and that it was to go in the center as in these prototypes.You simply stated with no evidence other than(I'm guessing here)the location of the camera in the iPhone that Apple would never put a camera in the center.I pointed out the most "obvious"reason you were wrong on this model.
It's pretty funny that you apparently thought it was "obvious"that they wouldn't do that based on what they had done in the past(predictability).

And I will repeat that there are a lot of people (not necessarily you) who are in no more position to know than I who flatly state"that's not what Apple would do"about any number of things.Of course that's not new,a quick check of the threads the day the first iPod was launched,the fat nano,the 2nd gen iPhone,etc.turns up plenty of examples.It's pretty strange.Instead of saying they don't like a plastic back,or round volume buttons,or a curved back,or a seam here or a screw there they say"Apple would never do that".Personally I don't get it.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. I don't know why I said what I said. It was a guess. But ya, I really don't know anything inside the world of apple other than I love their products and back them up on issues like leaks and stuff, like how the gizmodo thing should be wrong and everything. Idk. Its fun to comment and see what people will say, but I don't mean to offend anyone, really.
 
na1577 said:
Well first of all, I'm not the person you were talking to before. (that was user "E.Lizardo")

Anyway, the point of my post was to show that Apple has already planned a location for a camera, in the center. An offset camera like the iPhone would make more sense, but we already have evidence that shows that Apple believes otherwise.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was too lazy to check. And I know, I agree with you completely that the camera would apparently be placed in the center. I just think that it kinda ruins symmetry with the little black thing on the right back side for wifi reception.
 
E.Lizardo said:
You stated that music players we not for making pictures,and therefore the touch should not have a camera.I pointed out that an even simpler,less capable music player in the iPod line did have a camera.I guess I should have taken a paragraph to point out what only took a few words.Sorry.
Click to expand...

I know, you're right. It makes sense (kinda) for the Touch to have a music player. I originally meant that iPod was for music only and now has expanded to video in the nano. You're right, why shouldn't hte touch, a device with more capacity to do more things, have a camera? My point was just that that should be a feature (not that i'm in a place to tell what should and shouldn't be) for cell phones from a marketing point. I mean, it's one of the features the iPhone has that the Touch doesn't. Buying a nano over an iPhone won't really accomplish anything, because it doesn't have anythign the iPhone has other than music and now video. But if the Touch could do picture/video, it would be one less thing in the barrier between the Touch and iPhone...
 
E.Lizardo said:
OK lets say that does happen.Why is it bad(if you are saying it is bad)?
Click to expand...

Its bad if they don't plan on bringing the iPhone to other networks. WHy would people continue to buy iPhones if they could just get an iPod Touch, which would have nearly every feature of an iphone with the camera , and a Verizon miFi thingy?
 
sportguy0913 said:
Its bad if they don't plan on bringing the iPhone to other networks. WHy would people continue to buy iPhones if they could just get an iPod Touch, which would have nearly every feature of an iphone with the camera , and a Verizon miFi thingy?
Click to expand...

I would not be surprised to see the iPod touch always stay behind in features. For example, if the iPhone gets a front and rear camera, the ipod touch could get just a front camera.

The reason to get an iPhone remains: more features and phone calls anywhere (if you can get reception ;) )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back