No. That's exactly what I mean. Just like the MacBooks, the tablet will come in "small" and "large" version (and maybe a "medium"). The small version will be the iPod Touch (with enhanced feature set, including camera etc.)
Spot on, this comment.
If it's not a technical/manufacturing issue with the camera it's simply Apple waiting for a few months so that some of the tablet technology (processor etc) can trickle down into a totally new and revamped/redesigned iPod touch line in January (or later, whenever).
That's when the "small" version of the tablet/touch gets the camera, not now. No need to rush the camera into the last hurrah of the iPod touch when there will be totally new, very droolworthy, and fantastic next-gen hardware just months from now*. Makes perfect sense to me ... why equip it with x camera when y camera (a slightly better one) will be in production shortly. Just finish up the current touch with a little speed upgrade and then boom! One more thing in January.
* And yes, I do think that anyone buying the touch today (and I had my wallet ready for a camera equipped one today to replace my 1st gen 8GB one, but no more, I'm waiting) will be kicking themselves four months from now when the real new iPod touch line (including tablet, and camera) debuts. This is Apple after all, always thinking forward.
Here is come compelling information as to why the Touch didn?t get a camera, but take it with a grain of salt.
Q You put a camcorder on the iPod Nano. Why not on the iPod Touch?
A Originally, we weren?t exactly sure how to market the Touch. Was it an iPhone without the phone? Was it a pocket computer? What happened was, what customers told us was, they started to see it as a game machine. Because a lot of the games were free on the store. Customers started to tell us, ?You don?t know what you?ve got here ? it?s a great game machine, with the multitouch screen, the accelerometer, and so on.?
We started to market it that way, and it just took off. And now what we really see is it?s the lowest-cost way to the App Store, and that?s the big draw. So what we were focused on is just reducing the price to $199. We don?t need to add new stuff ? we need to get the price down where everyone can afford it.
I think Apple will be discontinuing the iPod Touch line, and they left out the camera for this reason. The iPod Touch will be reborn as the entry level Apple Tablet device which will include the camera, and a host of other new features. It will be available alongside it's 7" or 9" (or whatever) sibling
I was thinking about this too. I suppose this is a possibility. But no, I don't think it will happen. If anything, the new tablet device would be compared to the iphone because I'm sure it will have a built in 3G radio. Or maybe not.
I'm sorry, but really, why is everyone in full on geek rage over an unsubstantiated rumor not coming to fruition?
Because it was way wayyy more than a rumor. It was just about a done deal. We're all amateur tech analysts here and it was common knowledge by now that it was indeed going to have a camera. It was a behind the scenes MAJOR FOULUP that caused the new ipod touch not to have a camera.
Dude, why are you trying to start something? Are you a punk? I calmed myself down and told him to drop it because I saw it was going to needlessly escalate. What are you a high schooler? Get back on topic.
Here is come compelling information as to why the Touch didn?t get a camera, but take it with a grain of salt.
Q You put a camcorder on the iPod Nano. Why not on the iPod Touch?
A Originally, we weren?t exactly sure how to market the Touch. Was it an iPhone without the phone? Was it a pocket computer? What happened was, what customers told us was, they started to see it as a game machine. Because a lot of the games were free on the store. Customers started to tell us, ?You don?t know what you?ve got here ? it?s a great game machine, with the multitouch screen, the accelerometer, and so on.?
We started to market it that way, and it just took off. And now what we really see is it?s the lowest-cost way to the App Store, and that?s the big draw. So what we were focused on is just reducing the price to $199. We don?t need to add new stuff ? we need to get the price down where everyone can afford it.
I thought that answer by Jobs was completely insulting to his customer base. He obviously thinks we are all retarded. Who exactly is the punk? I'll tell you. We all are the punks!
So no FM Radio (yet they can in the Nano)? No details on the CPU?
The ZuneHD is cheaper and has:
FM Radio & HD Radio
OLED Screen
1GHZ NVIDIA TEGRA.
I saw that Apple was really pushing the Gaming experience. But the Zune will be having gaming, its GPU and CPU can do more and Microsoft has shown with the Xbox that it can take games from the leader (Sony) and bring them to its platform.
Now, I know this is an Apple fansite but from what I see out in the rest of the world... the ZuneHD really does have a chance. What are your thoughts... people really expected more.
The Zune, technically speaking, is a better device (outputs 720p video so hooking it up to your HD flat panel and watching the movies you downloaded/rented is sweet) and the games will be a bit better with the powerful GPU included in the Tegra BUT, and with a lot of "been there before feeling", can the Zune really make it in the market. Before succumbing to the iPod world, I had a 1st gen Zune and was the only idiot around searching for other Zunester's to network with. Who knows how this will pan out. Apple still holds 75% market share so it will be tough for MS. And you can stream all the FM/HD radio stations anyway on the iPhone/Touch via one of the internet radio aggregation services such as vTuner or WunderRadio. Check out iHeart radio app which has a new artist streams from Weezer.
It can't be the thinness. Because they added a video camera to the nano didn't they? Which is a surprise to me by the way....I thought it was only going to be a still camera for the nano. On a side note, this new nano should really put a dent into the Flip sales.
Except it's only a 640x480 video-only camera. It can't even take still photos based on Apple's web pages (and who'd want that at that low resolution anyway). Adding a low-res camera in something as thin as the nano is probably no big deal. But a higher quality, higher resolution camera is likely a bit bigger module (little bit bigger sensor and bigger lens needing more distance between the lens and the sensor to focus properly = thicker case). So it is possible that thinness was an issue for the touch.
Except it's only a 640x480 video-only camera. It can't even take still photos based on Apple's web pages (and who'd want that at that low resolution anyway). Adding a low-res camera in something as thin as the nano is probably no big deal. But a higher quality, higher resolution camera is likely a bit bigger module (little bit bigger sensor and bigger lens needing more distance between the lens and the sensor to focus properly = thicker case). So it is possible that thinness was an issue for the touch.
Yes I've just recently learned this after I made that post. I'm STILL shaking my head over that one. But according to Mr. Jobs in the Pogue interview, the reason for the nano not being able to take pictures was indeed because the sensor needed for taking auto-focused pictures would be too thick to fit into the nano casing.
Whatever. Would it have killed Jobs to have an ipod touch that was just a tad thicker? I be we're talking millimeters aren't we?
I wanted to buy a touch today but this product feels like a stop gap to the real touch that will come out with the next iteration.
Either lies about the real reason or just disdain for their customers. I am a devoted Apple fan but I think they are just holding out on users and hope they get some real competition to force them to treat their customers with a little respect. This update is simply an insult.
There was a real opportunity to have everyone going into the holiday season with a sense of excitement, now all they have created is a big sense of disappointment. Kind of a shame.
Could be my misunderstanding. When you look at the tech specs for the 8GB vs. 32/64GB touches, volume control isn't listed for the 8GB but is for the 32/64. Link
Without buttons this cannot be a successful "gaming" device. It will just be a device that plays games.
Right...and there is no way that a phone without a physical keyboard could possibly be successful...oh...wait...
I understand the frustration with the iPod Touch not getting a camera. On this forum (and probably many of the people we're connected with) it is a big deal. However, I would guess that the Nano has a much larger user base and a larger possibility for additional income during the holiday season. I would tend to agree with others who are conjecturing that the "new" iPod Touch will be related to whatever the touch line will be.
We all need to remember that the people on this forum represent a very SMALL percentage of the millions of iPod users on the planet and we have limited insight into Apple's marketing research. I think the stock price speaks volumes considering our current world economic situation.
Give me a break. You are the moron for believing the rumor sites! They don't want the Touch to tap into iPhone sales. If you want a camera in the iPod Touch, buy an iPhone. Since you don't have an iPhone, you don't know what the hell you are talking about. You are reading posts on a message board. I have no problem with AT&T and I get great service in Los Angeles. All my friends with iPhones have great service too, both originals and 3G's. Apple did not drop the ball, you were the idiot that believed the rumors would be true!
Let's see, the 32GB iPhone 3GS is 2.6 times more expensive than 32GB iPod touch, if they don't want it to 'tap' into sales, don't you think they would drop the price of the phone a little?
Here is come compelling information as to why the Touch didn?t get a camera, but take it with a grain of salt.
Q You put a camcorder on the iPod Nano. Why not on the iPod Touch?
A Originally, we weren?t exactly sure how to market the Touch. Was it an iPhone without the phone? Was it a pocket computer? What happened was, what customers told us was, they started to see it as a game machine. Because a lot of the games were free on the store. Customers started to tell us, ?You don?t know what you?ve got here ? it?s a great game machine, with the multitouch screen, the accelerometer, and so on.?
We started to market it that way, and it just took off. And now what we really see is it?s the lowest-cost way to the App Store, and that?s the big draw. So what we were focused on is just reducing the price to $199. We don?t need to add new stuff ? we need to get the price down where everyone can afford it.
Yes I've just recently learned this after I made that post. I'm STILL shaking my head over that one. But according to Mr. Jobs in the Pogue interview, the reason for the nano not being able to take pictures was indeed because the sensor needed for taking auto-focused pictures would be too thick to fit into the nano casing.
Whatever. Would it have killed Jobs to have an ipod touch that was just a tad thicker? I be we're talking millimeters aren't we?
Just in cast folks didn't follow the link to the interview, here is the quote Olternaut is referring to in the Jobs/Pogue interview. Basically confirming my suspicion when the rumor of "technical problems" first came out:
Q. How come the Nano can now record video, but can?t take stills?
A. The sensors for doing video are fairly thin. The sensors for doing a still camera, at much higher pixel resolution ? and we?d really like to have autofocus ? they are just way too thick to ever fit inside the Nano.
The touch is thicker than the nano, but not as thick as the iPhone, especially near the edges. Apple could have maybe put a camera in there, but perhaps not as high a resolution and not an autofocus camera like the iPhone. And we would have all probably cried foul if they put a lower-res, non-autofocus camera in the touch, complaining that it wasn't as good as the iPhone's.
The problem is that people shouldn't be hanging so much hope on rumors. All the stories you linked had the word rumor in the link, in the headline and in the text. I think that should be enough of a hint that it might not be real.
You're absolutely right, that's why they've sold 20 million of them...
So there are 50 million iPhones, and iPod touchs, 1.8 billion downloads, does that mean on average that users of these devices have downloaded 36 applications each?
Comments
No. That's exactly what I mean. Just like the MacBooks, the tablet will come in "small" and "large" version (and maybe a "medium"). The small version will be the iPod Touch (with enhanced feature set, including camera etc.)
Spot on, this comment.
If it's not a technical/manufacturing issue with the camera it's simply Apple waiting for a few months so that some of the tablet technology (processor etc) can trickle down into a totally new and revamped/redesigned iPod touch line in January (or later, whenever).
That's when the "small" version of the tablet/touch gets the camera, not now. No need to rush the camera into the last hurrah of the iPod touch when there will be totally new, very droolworthy, and fantastic next-gen hardware just months from now*. Makes perfect sense to me ... why equip it with x camera when y camera (a slightly better one) will be in production shortly. Just finish up the current touch with a little speed upgrade and then boom! One more thing in January.
* And yes, I do think that anyone buying the touch today (and I had my wallet ready for a camera equipped one today to replace my 1st gen 8GB one, but no more, I'm waiting) will be kicking themselves four months from now when the real new iPod touch line (including tablet, and camera) debuts. This is Apple after all, always thinking forward.
Here is come compelling information as to why the Touch didn?t get a camera, but take it with a grain of salt. ? http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/0...wt=nytimesbits
They could've done an iPhone 3G/3Gs and kept the iPod Touch (at $199) and had an "iPod Touch S" with a camera.
I think Apple will be discontinuing the iPod Touch line, and they left out the camera for this reason. The iPod Touch will be reborn as the entry level Apple Tablet device which will include the camera, and a host of other new features. It will be available alongside it's 7" or 9" (or whatever) sibling
I was thinking about this too. I suppose this is a possibility. But no, I don't think it will happen. If anything, the new tablet device would be compared to the iphone because I'm sure it will have a built in 3G radio. Or maybe not.
I'm sorry, but really, why is everyone in full on geek rage over an unsubstantiated rumor not coming to fruition?
Because it was way wayyy more than a rumor. It was just about a done deal. We're all amateur tech analysts here and it was common knowledge by now that it was indeed going to have a camera. It was a behind the scenes MAJOR FOULUP that caused the new ipod touch not to have a camera.
Dude shut up seriously.
If he don't ban you he is a punk.
Either way you are a punk.
Dude, why are you trying to start something? Are you a punk? I calmed myself down and told him to drop it because I saw it was going to needlessly escalate. What are you a high schooler? Get back on topic.
Here is come compelling information as to why the Touch didn?t get a camera, but take it with a grain of salt. ? http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/0...wt=nytimesbits
I thought that answer by Jobs was completely insulting to his customer base. He obviously thinks we are all retarded. Who exactly is the punk? I'll tell you. We all are the punks!
So no FM Radio (yet they can in the Nano)? No details on the CPU?
The ZuneHD is cheaper and has:
FM Radio & HD Radio
OLED Screen
1GHZ NVIDIA TEGRA.
I saw that Apple was really pushing the Gaming experience. But the Zune will be having gaming, its GPU and CPU can do more and Microsoft has shown with the Xbox that it can take games from the leader (Sony) and bring them to its platform.
Now, I know this is an Apple fansite but from what I see out in the rest of the world... the ZuneHD really does have a chance. What are your thoughts... people really expected more.
The Zune, technically speaking, is a better device (outputs 720p video so hooking it up to your HD flat panel and watching the movies you downloaded/rented is sweet) and the games will be a bit better with the powerful GPU included in the Tegra BUT, and with a lot of "been there before feeling", can the Zune really make it in the market. Before succumbing to the iPod world, I had a 1st gen Zune and was the only idiot around searching for other Zunester's to network with. Who knows how this will pan out. Apple still holds 75% market share so it will be tough for MS. And you can stream all the FM/HD radio stations anyway on the iPhone/Touch via one of the internet radio aggregation services such as vTuner or WunderRadio. Check out iHeart radio app which has a new artist streams from Weezer.
Didn't the 8GB 2g touch have a volume control? Apparently it's gone today along with the remote.
?? Please explain.
It can't be the thinness. Because they added a video camera to the nano didn't they? Which is a surprise to me by the way....I thought it was only going to be a still camera for the nano. On a side note, this new nano should really put a dent into the Flip sales.
Except it's only a 640x480 video-only camera. It can't even take still photos based on Apple's web pages (and who'd want that at that low resolution anyway). Adding a low-res camera in something as thin as the nano is probably no big deal. But a higher quality, higher resolution camera is likely a bit bigger module (little bit bigger sensor and bigger lens needing more distance between the lens and the sensor to focus properly = thicker case). So it is possible that thinness was an issue for the touch.
Except it's only a 640x480 video-only camera. It can't even take still photos based on Apple's web pages (and who'd want that at that low resolution anyway). Adding a low-res camera in something as thin as the nano is probably no big deal. But a higher quality, higher resolution camera is likely a bit bigger module (little bit bigger sensor and bigger lens needing more distance between the lens and the sensor to focus properly = thicker case). So it is possible that thinness was an issue for the touch.
Yes I've just recently learned this after I made that post. I'm STILL shaking my head over that one. But according to Mr. Jobs in the Pogue interview, the reason for the nano not being able to take pictures was indeed because the sensor needed for taking auto-focused pictures would be too thick to fit into the nano casing.
Whatever. Would it have killed Jobs to have an ipod touch that was just a tad thicker? I be we're talking millimeters aren't we?
Either lies about the real reason or just disdain for their customers. I am a devoted Apple fan but I think they are just holding out on users and hope they get some real competition to force them to treat their customers with a little respect. This update is simply an insult.
There was a real opportunity to have everyone going into the holiday season with a sense of excitement, now all they have created is a big sense of disappointment. Kind of a shame.
?? Please explain.
Could be my misunderstanding. When you look at the tech specs for the 8GB vs. 32/64GB touches, volume control isn't listed for the 8GB but is for the 32/64. Link
You're absolutely right, that's why they've sold 20 million of them...
I am sorry you do not have the cognitive function to understand what i was saying.
Without buttons this cannot be a successful "gaming" device. It will just be a device that plays games.
Right...and there is no way that a phone without a physical keyboard could possibly be successful...oh...wait...
I understand the frustration with the iPod Touch not getting a camera. On this forum (and probably many of the people we're connected with) it is a big deal. However, I would guess that the Nano has a much larger user base and a larger possibility for additional income during the holiday season. I would tend to agree with others who are conjecturing that the "new" iPod Touch will be related to whatever the touch line will be.
We all need to remember that the people on this forum represent a very SMALL percentage of the millions of iPod users on the planet and we have limited insight into Apple's marketing research. I think the stock price speaks volumes considering our current world economic situation.
The bullshit rumors never said the Classic would get a camera! Who the hell listens to FM? Can't believe you fell for a rumor that never existed!
I cant believe you have scorned somebody for believing in a false rumor without even doing a cursory check about the rumors.
Lets try
http://www.tuaw.com/2009/08/27/rumor...-get-a-camera/
http://www.electricpig.co.uk/2009/08...-get-a-camera/
http://topnews.us/content/26772-digi...g-ipod-classic
Perhaps a Google 101 course is in order?
Give me a break. You are the moron for believing the rumor sites! They don't want the Touch to tap into iPhone sales. If you want a camera in the iPod Touch, buy an iPhone. Since you don't have an iPhone, you don't know what the hell you are talking about. You are reading posts on a message board. I have no problem with AT&T and I get great service in Los Angeles. All my friends with iPhones have great service too, both originals and 3G's. Apple did not drop the ball, you were the idiot that believed the rumors would be true!
Let's see, the 32GB iPhone 3GS is 2.6 times more expensive than 32GB iPod touch, if they don't want it to 'tap' into sales, don't you think they would drop the price of the phone a little?
Here is come compelling information as to why the Touch didn?t get a camera, but take it with a grain of salt. ? http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/0...wt=nytimesbits
Yes I've just recently learned this after I made that post. I'm STILL shaking my head over that one. But according to Mr. Jobs in the Pogue interview, the reason for the nano not being able to take pictures was indeed because the sensor needed for taking auto-focused pictures would be too thick to fit into the nano casing.
Whatever. Would it have killed Jobs to have an ipod touch that was just a tad thicker? I be we're talking millimeters aren't we?
Just in cast folks didn't follow the link to the interview, here is the quote Olternaut is referring to in the Jobs/Pogue interview. Basically confirming my suspicion when the rumor of "technical problems" first came out: The touch is thicker than the nano, but not as thick as the iPhone, especially near the edges. Apple could have maybe put a camera in there, but perhaps not as high a resolution and not an autofocus camera like the iPhone. And we would have all probably cried foul if they put a lower-res, non-autofocus camera in the touch, complaining that it wasn't as good as the iPhone's.
I cant believe you have scorned somebody for believing in a false rumor without even doing a cursory check about the rumors.
Lets try
http://www.tuaw.com/2009/08/27/rumor...-get-a-camera/
http://www.electricpig.co.uk/2009/08...-get-a-camera/
http://topnews.us/content/26772-digi...g-ipod-classic
Perhaps a Google 101 course is in order?
The problem is that people shouldn't be hanging so much hope on rumors. All the stories you linked had the word rumor in the link, in the headline and in the text. I think that should be enough of a hint that it might not be real.
You're absolutely right, that's why they've sold 20 million of them...
So there are 50 million iPhones, and iPod touchs, 1.8 billion downloads, does that mean on average that users of these devices have downloaded 36 applications each?