Flash pricing doesn't scale quite like that. It doesn't scale linearly as you suggested.
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 Touch CAPACITY - Why Doesn't Anyone CARE?
- Thread starter Tones2
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'd happily pay $550 for a 128GB Touch. So would a lot of people. You can't compare a 16 GB iPad to a 128GB iPad - Completely different markets.
Tony
ucfgrad93
macrumors Core
SMALL high capacity primarily music device vs. a LARGE low capacity primarily internet device.
Tony
the reason we don't have a 128GB touch is less to do with cost than steve's obsession with size and his premeditated upgrade path.
The sense of entitlement in this thread is pretty funny.
"Add 2x more chips in and make it thicker and charge me an extra $100?"
What is the cost of adding in more chips?
What is the cost of R&D and testing for a new PCB design? For the new case design?
What is the cost of manufacturing for a completely different touch?
What is the cost of logistics and supply for a separate touch model?
What is the cost of supporting this separate touch?
What affect will this have on the rest of the ipod line in terms of marketing and perception?
Is the market for this 128GB touch worth going through all that ****? To satisfy a few people who *need* to have their libraries on them at all times? Does a $100 premium make up for all the extra **** above?
I wouldn't mind paying extra for another USB port on my MBA either. Doesn't mean Apple's going to redesign and support a separate model just for me and a few other consumers though. You're an outlier, not the target market. Grow up and accept it.
"Add 2x more chips in and make it thicker and charge me an extra $100?"
What is the cost of adding in more chips?
What is the cost of R&D and testing for a new PCB design? For the new case design?
What is the cost of manufacturing for a completely different touch?
What is the cost of logistics and supply for a separate touch model?
What is the cost of supporting this separate touch?
What affect will this have on the rest of the ipod line in terms of marketing and perception?
Is the market for this 128GB touch worth going through all that ****? To satisfy a few people who *need* to have their libraries on them at all times? Does a $100 premium make up for all the extra **** above?
I wouldn't mind paying extra for another USB port on my MBA either. Doesn't mean Apple's going to redesign and support a separate model just for me and a few other consumers though. You're an outlier, not the target market. Grow up and accept it.
miles01110
macrumors Core
Too bad for you and the other 5 people that feel the need to complain about a trend that's been in motion for over 2-3 years now. What's good for the vast minority of users obviously isn't good for the bottom line.
Ace134blue
macrumors 6502a
Um, 1. Flash drives get really expensive the higher capacity it has, you said that already.
2. The ipods 5 years ago had *real* physical hard drives with a platter which is significantly less expensive. You know how much a ipod touch with 128gb of storage would cost? Atleast 600$.
3. You know why steve didnt leave that as an option? Well the price mainly, steve goes with the majority of people. The majority of people do not need that much space, and even if they did few people would spend 600+$ for an ipod let alone be able to afford it.
Ace134blue
macrumors 6502a
You know the old saying? You buy cheap you get cheap. Why would apple waste money on a dirt cheap slow nand chip? If you want to put them chips in yours, go ahead and have fun with the 3 min boot times and 10 sec app launches. Theres a reason they are so cheap. High performing ones are much more expensive than those crap nand chips.
coldpower27
macrumors regular
Fixed.
Maybe you would but not many people could justify throwing 550 USD on a MP3 Player...there is a reason the 500 USD 1st Gen Price Point has never reared it's head again.
I would say it's very niche market, not enough for Apple to make a whole seperate model for.
There is a reason the iPad occupies the price points it does right now, out of reach of the iPod Touches...
Didn't you hear? Someone in this very thread knows tons of people who would pay through the nose for it. The only reason it doesn't exist is because Steve Jobs wants things thin; it has nothing to do with market research, the economics of it, sourcing adequate parts, etc.
Very well put. Complaining about something is not going to magically make it happen or change to what you want. Most people have excepted the fact that 64gb is the max, and can live with that. Some people do love to complain for for the sake of complaining, sometimes.
LEStudios
macrumors 6502
I'm getting the 32GB iPod Touch 4
I want the 64GB but I can afford to get the 32GB plus when I get the iPhone 4 32GB I just transfer my data. Maybe next year they have 128GB but most people may be buying the 8GB because it's the lowest price and not care about the size. You also got to look at iPhone 4 and iPad capacity. Apple don't want to erode or canibbalize sales of another line. All I can say is deal with it and be happy. 😉
I want the 64GB but I can afford to get the 32GB plus when I get the iPhone 4 32GB I just transfer my data. Maybe next year they have 128GB but most people may be buying the 8GB because it's the lowest price and not care about the size. You also got to look at iPhone 4 and iPad capacity. Apple don't want to erode or canibbalize sales of another line. All I can say is deal with it and be happy. 😉
Krevnik
macrumors 601
The problem is that it really doesn't.
If I double the demand on a product with a fixed rate of supply, the price adjusts to the demand (or you simply don't get extra chips meaning your costs don't change).
If I make 100 64GB units, thats 200 32GB chips worth of demand. If I make 50 of 64GB and 50 of 128GB, then I'm looking at 250 32GB chips worth of demand on the same rate of supply. That affects pricing of chips of the correct read/write speed I need for my device.
Now I can tweak the supply of my devices so that I still need the same number of 32GB chips, and then it will scale linearly in terms of cost (assuming that I change the design to handle the extra space required, the extra circuit runs, etc).
That's just assuming the same chip in all cases though. As you buy different capacity chips (8GB chips are much cheaper than 32GB chips, much more than 4x depending on the application).
And the pricing of a random piece of flash doesn't mean the pricing of the flash a specific device needs is also changing in the same way. Low demand and easy supply of low-speed, low-capacity chips can drive prices down quite a bit in that area. But that's not where the demand is. The demand is for large, fast chips (SSDs and mobile devices), and that's what drives the non-linear scaling in price. Well, that and yield issues of manufacturing at the bleeding edge vs tech that has been in manufacturing for nearly a decade.
miles01110
macrumors Core
Looks like this thread is of the "People who understand microeconomics vs. People who don't" garden variety.
Why bother to think when you can just stick your fingers in your ears and go: "I WANT I WANT! GIMMIE! APPLE IS SO STOOOOOPID FOR IGNORING ME!"
Looks like this is a thread of people who wish they weren't the only ones who valued diverse music over games and the internet. Sure the market has decided in favour of lower capacity touch-based devices, the people in this thread simply wish it hadn't, and that Apple hadn't single-mindedly go after only the most lucrative market and decided to ditch that market segment as well. Its not a question of understanding economics.
What if Apple decided to ditch Mac Pros in favour of more consumer oriented computers because that's a more popular and profitable market segment? Would you poke fun at the people who lamented this and claimed they don't "don't understand microeconomics" and should just deal?
Apple was in a market segment, and now they're leaving it. Some of us think that's too bad, so we're commiserating, is that a problem for you?
Isn't that the consumer's job? Hell isn't that what this website is partly about?
+1. I was thinking about responding as well because the comment you quoted disappointed me.
Definitely! However, I think most of us can understand why Apple did things a certain way instead of whining that their sense of entitlement wasn't fulfilled and propose pie-in-the-sky ways that Apple "should" have done things.
Sure, I'm not happy about the massive downgrade the Nano got, I'm not happy about the relatively high price of the iPads, and I'm not happy about how port-crippled the MBA is. But I'm not whining that Apple *should* have done things different to suit my own (and in the minority) needs.
0098386
Suspended
I care 🙁. This update was almost perfect for me but I just can't make the jump if it's only 64gb. I'm sure the next update will bring in 128gb iPods and maybe some more nifty features.
I don't like to fuss around managing my music collection on my iPods, I like it all with me wherever I go so I guess I'll be stuck using my 5.5G iPod for another year.
I don't like to fuss around managing my music collection on my iPods, I like it all with me wherever I go so I guess I'll be stuck using my 5.5G iPod for another year.
They didn't ditch any market segment, since they still sell the Classic. Did you know that? You can still buy one. It's already been said in the thread.
Just because people want to buy updated iPod Classics doesn't mean Apple can update them and still sell them at a profit. Do you think Apple should take a loss to satisfy some consumers?