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.
Steve Jobs on iPod Touch, Future Products and Ice Cream
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
apple always establish facts then find strange excuses from their "think differently heads". Its no wonder many times they makes little sense to normal people.
only fanboys buy those bs. SJ apparently has them in his hands and can say whatever bs he wants.
Originally Posted by carmenodie View Post
do you really believe that crap about no camera on the touch for price reasons? Please. they'll have a camera on them between the end of this year and before summer 2010.
You guys should learn to read ... How does "between the end of this year and before summer 2010" mean "next month" or "this year" ?
On the other hand, this is very true.
do you really believe that crap about no camera on the touch for price reasons? Please. they'll have a camera on them between the end of this year and before summer 2010.
You guys should learn to read ... How does "between the end of this year and before summer 2010" mean "next month" or "this year" ?
On the other hand, this is very true.
Didn't Apple tell us this morning that their new video cameras are free??!!
What they were referring to with the netbooks was low-quality products.
Now he wants inexpensive (for the consumer) products.
Two different meanings for cheap here.
I'm satisfied with this explanation. If you want a camera and all that other stuff, um, get an iphone (ducks and covers). 
There's a difference between the video parts and those needed for still pictures - Jobs says it in the interview, the reason they didn't add an actual photo camera in the nano is because the parts needed are a lot thicker. The same would apply to the touch; theoretically, that would also mean it'd cost more to include the sensors for a still camera.
There is a big difference in cheap and inexpensive. I believe he mint the later.I think what people are not thinking about is the bottom line.
Apple is a business. How much does a nano cost apple $30-50? so they make $100. surly an iPod touch cost more to make so less profit. this is just my speculation sell more of what we make more on. spend more time on what we make more money on.(these numbers are guesses I do not know for a fact)
Well, if Mr. Jobs wants to join the rest of us Bears at IBR 2010 in San Francisco, for a couple of days, we'll make sure that we help him put on some weight...there's Ghirardelli in Fisherman's Wharf, Pasta Pomodoro all over the City, yummy dim sum at Yank Sing, and The Sausage Factory in the Castro. C'mon Mr. Jobs, Mr. Wozniak will share!
I think there is a pretty strong possibility there was some technical problems with the camera in the iPod Touch that required the feature to be pulled. Especially, if Jobs said that still camera requires thicker components, it's possible that Apple was trying to fit a still and video camera into the Touch's thinner design (compared to the iPhone) and it didn't work out.
Certainly, the wide gap between the $199 8GB 2nd gen Touch and the $299 32 GB 3rd gen Touch does seem strange and may indicate there is something missing. Previously, the 8GB iPhone 3G sold for $199 and the 8GB 2nd gen Touch sold for $229, while now the 8GB iPhone 3G sells for $99 and the price gap for the 8GB 2nd gen Touch has widened since it sells for $199. If Apple really wanted to push iPod Touch adoption with low prices, they could have priced the 8GB 2nd gen Touch closer to the iPhone 3G as it used to be.
I wouldn't be surprised if there ended up being an iPod Touch refresh early next year to add the still/video camera. The 32GB and 64GB prices would probably remain the same, while a 16GB model could be introduced at $249 and the 8GB 2nd gen model could stay at $199 or drop to $179. If there is an iTablet release in January, that would seem the perfect time to tag along a quiet iPod Touch refresh. Has there been any references in the latest iPhone OS to an iPod Touch 3.2?
Certainly, the wide gap between the $199 8GB 2nd gen Touch and the $299 32 GB 3rd gen Touch does seem strange and may indicate there is something missing. Previously, the 8GB iPhone 3G sold for $199 and the 8GB 2nd gen Touch sold for $229, while now the 8GB iPhone 3G sells for $99 and the price gap for the 8GB 2nd gen Touch has widened since it sells for $199. If Apple really wanted to push iPod Touch adoption with low prices, they could have priced the 8GB 2nd gen Touch closer to the iPhone 3G as it used to be.
I wouldn't be surprised if there ended up being an iPod Touch refresh early next year to add the still/video camera. The 32GB and 64GB prices would probably remain the same, while a 16GB model could be introduced at $249 and the 8GB 2nd gen model could stay at $199 or drop to $179. If there is an iTablet release in January, that would seem the perfect time to tag along a quiet iPod Touch refresh. Has there been any references in the latest iPhone OS to an iPod Touch 3.2?
err.... Welcome to America with a McDonalds, BK, TacoBell or Wendy's every quarter mile?
Vegitarian and want to gain weight? Not a problem get a coke + fries = that's a thousand calories there alone - do that 4-5x a day and you'll have bigger boobs then your wife in a matter of weeks
Ever seen Supersize me.... at the end the doctor said if you continue to eat this way you will have liver damage
hum... i certainly know that would go straight into my fat ass... muscles, not so much.
-=-=-=-
on another note, does the new iPod touch have a magnetometer? i haven't read anything about that. if apple is serious about not having upgraded the iPod touch because they wanted to keep the price point down as a gaming machine (which i totally doubt is the truth. those rumored pre-release technical errors seem more like fact now), shouldn't the new device also have a built in magnetometer for more advanced game development?
Not going to happen and you wouldn't want the nano camera anyhow. They are not going to release a phoneless iPhone.
I have never owned a nano, until now. Just purchased the 16gb black with engraving of live long and prosper on the back. I'm sure these things are going to fly out the door. Say all you want about the Touch getting the short stick. They will not put it a position to take over iphone sales. It is a casual gaming device and music/video player. The nano is for music and exercise. From a marketing stand-point they are doing it right.
I'm a very causal game player, I have an old XBox with about 7 games, and old PSP with about 7 games and 5 movies. Since I got my iphone I hardly touch either one of them. I'm at a point where I use my phone too much and I figure it's better to play my music on a nano to conserve the phone battery. I like to be plugged into my music all day and that is too hard on my phone. I just need to play Sudoku at lunch, read news reports and pull email and such on my phone then turn it off till I head for home.
I'm a very causal game player, I have an old XBox with about 7 games, and old PSP with about 7 games and 5 movies. Since I got my iphone I hardly touch either one of them. I'm at a point where I use my phone too much and I figure it's better to play my music on a nano to conserve the phone battery. I like to be plugged into my music all day and that is too hard on my phone. I just need to play Sudoku at lunch, read news reports and pull email and such on my phone then turn it off till I head for home.
A camera equipped iPod Touch would still lack GPS and always on internet connection to differentiate it from the iPhone, which is still fairly significant.
Why my vision never syncs up with Apple's vision:
I would rather drive a decked out Ford Taurus than a Lexus.
Apple just wants me to buy the flippin' car and shut up about it.
iPod Touch without camera/GPS = lack of xMac
They both lie within Apple's area of contempt. If you want more than a Nano/iMac, but less than iPhone/Mac Pro, Apple tells you to eff off.
-Clive
I would rather drive a decked out Ford Taurus than a Lexus.
Apple just wants me to buy the flippin' car and shut up about it.
iPod Touch without camera/GPS = lack of xMac
They both lie within Apple's area of contempt. If you want more than a Nano/iMac, but less than iPhone/Mac Pro, Apple tells you to eff off.
-Clive
Steve Jobs does not know the definition of a GAMING DEVICE. If he did, he would know that the iPod Touch is NOT a gaming device. Just because you can play some games on it while you're bored doesn't make it a gaming device.
My grandmother hands out lunches at the local school, but doesn't call herself a restauranteur.
My grandmother hands out lunches at the local school, but doesn't call herself a restauranteur.
I agree that Apple could have afforded to add GPS and a CAMERA for the $200 extra it gets for 64GB model.
iPod sales are declining because more and more consumers are buying cheaper and cheaper MP3 players that work with iTunes or similar software. When you purchase music from iTunes now it is DRM free and thus not tied to an Apple device.
Almost every single cell phone now comes with a camera that can take stills and video. Yet Apple couldn't find a way to add it to the Touch at the current price point? That makes no sense.
They could have added 3G WiFi and subsidized the cost of adding it from the cell carrier.
They could have added GPS and subsidized the cost of the hardware by charging a small fee to any App that utilizes GPS.
Apple without Jobs is just another electronics company.
But they stand to make WAYYYYY more money on the App Store.
So developers that were hoping to broaden their installed base just lost.
40% of the iPhone OS installed user base voted NO PHONE.
I'm pretty sure that not all of us did it because well, we just want to play games. Nope, we have other valid reasons....
Apple created a PDA. They might not have wanted to do that going in - but they did, now don't muck it up any more.
But frankly, i'd like to see the developers pushing for certain features to be available on all units. They probably carry more weight than us mere gamers.
And i'm still thinking there is going to be a "premium" model introduced before next summer....
So developers that were hoping to broaden their installed base just lost.
40% of the iPhone OS installed user base voted NO PHONE.
I'm pretty sure that not all of us did it because well, we just want to play games. Nope, we have other valid reasons....
Apple created a PDA. They might not have wanted to do that going in - but they did, now don't muck it up any more.
But frankly, i'd like to see the developers pushing for certain features to be available on all units. They probably carry more weight than us mere gamers.
And i'm still thinking there is going to be a "premium" model introduced before next summer....
I think the line about polishing upcoming products is the nearest we'll get to a hint that they are working on a tablet, it will be a big deal and it isn't going to be ready that soon.
That is my point exactly. This is either a major marketing blunder or Apple will be releasing an open carrier iPhone in the next year. Nothing else can explain it.
By intentionally crippling the Touch and marketing as "gaming device" (Which is total BS, the DSI blows the Touch out of the water as a gaming device) they leave greater room for iPhone sales in the USA and other countries that have single carrier systems.
I mean I don't see how this so called Tablet could compete against the iPhone or Touch. For that matter I don't see how a tablet competes against Netbooks. Your not going to carry a tablet in your pocket like a phone or Touch. Your not going to carry a tablet and type on a screen.
Actually there is a school of thought that says lower weight leads to longer longevity. In fact a low calorie diet rich in whole grains and fiber along with essential nutrients is what one scientist (Ray Kurzweil) is taking and he claims he got rid of his diabetes and is now looking and feeling 10 years younger than he did 10 years ago.
So, may be Steve should quit eating ice cream and remain healthy. All that milk fat is hard on the liver too.