Awesome! Apple just saved me about $200 or more. Since the new Touch lacks a camera and a microphone, there's absolutely no reason for me to upgrade mine of just four months. I'm disappointed, but I am also content to wait another year.
I had the money burning a hole in my pocket for an upgrade from a G1 8GB touch but Apple's questionable choices make that purchase much less likely. When the iPhone 3GS was introduced it was the first major platform to support OpenGL ES 2.0. This was a huge win for Apple but there was the legacy issue of all those iPod devices that only support OpenGL ES 1.1.
I figured at the time it was not a big deal since progress often involves older models being left behind. But now Apple has retarded progress in exchange for profit margin by making the high volume G3 8GB touch using the old graphics hardware and software. Why develop for the higher capability OGL ES 2 while Apple keeps pumping out new hardware units that can't use it?
I suppose the camera decision was made for them by some problem with manufacturing but the bean counters must have made the decision that first generation graphics is good enough. OK, then there is no reason for me to bother upgrading.
Apple has got me so ticked off, I'll probably put my energy into getting a 1-G iPhone cheap and forget buying these ho-hum iPod touches. That way, Apple won't get a penny and I'll probably save money.
I need a camera, and I need a mike and I don't want to pay AT&T fees. I also need them soon. I thought I would get that in the new touches. Instead, Apple is giving the tiny Nano more features but not the iPod touch. Why? With that tiny 2.2-inch Nano screen you can't see much of what you've taken and the equally tiny battery isn't likely to last long in video mode.
What's going on? If Apple has production problems with camera-equipped touches, they should say so, give us the details of new touch, and a release date. This cult of secrecy is such a pain. You'd think they were the Kremlin circa 1935. Both have a cult-like obsession with not admitting mistakes.
Still worse is the possibility that Apple wants to build high walls between its products, doling out features in odd ways to fit a marketing straight-jacket. The iPhone would be for work and business for those with the money. The touch is for games but not recreation, hence the lack of a camera and the boring length of game promotion today. Color touch users fat and flabby couch potatoes. The Nano is for mostly outdoor recreation (camera and Nike added), but has nothing that lets you get work done. If so, it's stupid move. Users don't want to klutz with 2-3 gadgets.
To add insult to injury, I just checked the specs on the new touches. The 8 gig model ships with the old-style earphones not the remote earphones and without a plastic dock adapter. Total saving for Apple? Probably about 25 to 50 cents. Cost to customers who don't want to pull their touch out of their pocket every time they pause music: $30 That stinks. Heck, even the cheap little $59 Shuttle ships with remote earphones. While Jobs was gone, the niggling little bean counters seem to have been running Apple. This is the unfortunate result.
I hate companies that treat their customers as if they were stupid, and that's precisely how I feel Apple is treating its customers now.
The one thing I've always abhorred before I switched to Mac are the segment of "elitist fanboi"ism associated with die-hard Mac users. Inkling is a clear example of this. I love my MacBook, I love my 32gb 2g iPod Touch and I lam a loyal Apple customer. I don't think they're treating me as if I was stupid. I had problems with my iTunes purchase and Apple took care of it within 24-48 hrs. Quit being such a whining little lamer.
I do not see how adding a camera or GPS would cannibalize iPhone sales. All the people that want an IPhone and are willing to switch to AT&T will still do so regardless of what an iPod Touch can do.
Most people who want to stick with Verizon, Sprint, T-Mo, etc.. will do so because of a number of reasons including far cheaper/better plans, network coverage, discounts, and a host of other reasons. They could add a front and rear facing camera on the iPhone with 10 MP resolution, offer video chats, a 64GB drive, a hardware keyboard which I really prefer, triple the battery life and I would still not get an iPhone because that means switching to AT&T. I had AT&T before and the coverage where I live is abominable not to mention no 3G whatsoever.
The iPod Touch should be aimed at people like me that want an iPhone without the phone part. I will hand it to Apple, they are very clever about leaving out quite a lot on purpose so they can very gradually add these over time. It took them 3 tries to add video and MMS to the iPhone for example. They will still get my money, just later rather than sooner.
Now I am so glad I bought my iPhone 3GS with video. Something is wrong with this picture here. Was it the thinness of the Touch that was preventing this or the addition of a mic that AT&T balked at?
Anyone who owns last year's Touch will not upgrade for just this. This is not good.
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.
But anyways, this "production problem" for the ipod touch with camera will cost consumers an entire product cycle before we can see and use them. And here I was thinking that Apple was going to disaappoint by releasing an ipod touch with a camera but no GPS!
Geez, without the camera I've got no incentive to upgrade. And that is how Apple makes their money isn't it? ......with consumers upgrading.
Wow, such off-the charts hyperventilation over a rumor that did not come to pass!?
Take a deep breath, folks.
As many have pointed out: (i) A Touch with all the bells and whistles will come, but only when it's ready and proper quality-wise, and can be priced right; (ii) It could well be an entry-level 'iTablet' when that is announced early next year; (iii) The ones intro'd today will substantially drop in price at that time, and completely kill off the Zunes et al (that's the reason Apple did not go all the way in lowering Touch prices - they want to take in a couple of more months of higher profit); (iv) They don't want to cannibalize the just-intro'd 3GS; (v) The real new product here is the Nano (what's not to like, with camera, video, FM....), and Apple thought that it needed some serious stand-alone attention, esp. with the back-to-school crowd that is looking for iPods at a lower price point.
And, thank you, Apple, for keeping the Classic and bumping up its specs for the same price!
For those of you who claim you are irredeemably p-o'd, go put your money where your conviction is and buy a Zune. And hope it comes with a camera. Bye.
Obviously you're angry but there's no need to lie. Zune HD is not cheaper. It also doesn't play games which is the primary use of the iPod touch.
Zune HD is cheaper. $219 for 16GB and $289 for 32GB. The iPod touch is 8GB for $199 and $299 for 32GB. Yes, you can get an iPod Touch 8GB for less, but overall the Zune HD is cheaper.
Shows Zune HD with a games menu. Microsoft has also confirmed there will be games. Will there be as many good games as the iPod Touch, will they be better or worse quality? Only time will tell.
The least Apple could have done is brought FM Radio to its entire lineup.
There are pros and cons to both platforms as I see it, but to dismiss that Apple didn't miss the boat in the minds of many people today is wrong. Go read Engadget and other sites where people are saying this makes their decision and the decision is Zune HD.
Quit being fanbois, and actually have a proper discussion. Yes the old Zune have been overall failures, but Microsoft had a tendency to try, try, try again and then get it right. Even the original Xbox was statiscally better than the PS2, so the Zunes have had better pricing and specs (such as Radio, WiFi Sync) The Radio features and tagging songs is great, something that the iPod Nano has embraced. The Zune is good for Apple, it helps them push foward. But I think this time around Apple seems to think like all of you, that the Zune is not worth competing against. I remember how the Zune 16 basically forced the arrival of the iPod Nano 16GB, as we saw iPod Nano 4GBs get quickly discontinued.
To ignore the better specs like Radio, OLED and not implement them can work or this could be the time Microsoft goes ahead. And I think many of you also ignore that the Zune HD is also a testing ground for Windows Mobile 7. Sure Windows Mobile is now a failure for the most part... it was designed in 2000 as PocketPC 2000 and has had limited upgrades since then. The problem was Microsoft was not innovative beyond the original creation of the platform. Apple seems to be stepping on that same problem with the iPods in my opinion. Video Camera is just flash, and I was hoping for OLED or FM/HD Radio. Apple needs to innovate, and the LP stuff is great but Zune HDs have comparible stuff on the Zune device itself and for free. It should be the first with OLED, first with HD Radio, it should compete with Tegra because they we are really talking games.
The fact remains, beyond hardware and iTunes the biggest focus was games and Microsoft has a clear advantage in the expertise of the Xbox and its connections. Someone commented and misread that Sony was gonna help Microsoft. No, what I said was that Microsoft has taken exclusive after exclusive away from Sony, and that getting software titles to end up on a Microsoft Platform is one of Microsofts key skills.
Zune HD is cheaper. $219 for 16GB and $289 for 32GB. The iPod touch is 8GB for $199 and $299 for 32GB. Yes, you can get an iPod Touch 8GB for less, but overall the Zune HD is cheaper.
Sept. 9 is my birthday, and just a week ago, my wife asked me, "What do you want for your birthday?". I told that I wanted a new Ipod 64GB touch with the "new camera/video" features, to replace my first gen 32GB Ipod touch. Looks like that ain't gonna happen. It was nice to see Steve back in form, but it was a GIANT MISTAKE to leave the camera off of the touch, and instead, put it on the Nano??? WTF??? Apple is going to lose tons of ipod sales this season, because of this major oversight. Not sure what to think. As one of the Apple faithful, this is one of the most disappointing releases yet. Because of this, Zune will probably gain more sales momentum this season.
Guess I'll have to get a Windows based netbook for my birthday.
No its not out... September 15th at Walmart, Bestbuy, Amazon, Newegg.
But I know your just being sarcastic and being a typical fanboi instead of having a mature discussion about why Apple should have included FM Radio and OLED. Why allow your competition to be better? Its not like the specs for the Zune have been secret (unlike Apple). Its been known for months it would have OLED and Tegra.
Zune HD is cheaper. $219 for 16GB and $289 for 32GB. The iPod touch is 8GB for $199 and $299 for 32GB. Yes, you can get an iPod Touch 8GB for less, but overall the Zune HD is cheaper.
Shows Zune HD with a games menu. Microsoft has also confirmed there will be games. Will there be as many good games as the iPod Touch, will they be better or worse quality? Only time will tell.
The least Apple could have done is brought FM Radio to its entire lineup.
There are pros and cons to both platforms as I see it, but to dismiss that Apple didn't miss the boat in the minds of many people today is wrong. Go read Engadget and other sites where people are saying this makes their decision and the decision is Zune HD.
Quit being fanbois, and actually have a proper discussion. Yes the old Zune have been overall failures, but Microsoft had a tendency to try, try, try again and then get it right. Even the original Xbox was statiscally better than the PS2, so the Zunes have had better pricing and specs (such as Radio, WiFi Sync) The Radio features and tagging songs is great, something that the iPod Nano has embraced. The Zune is good for Apple, it helps them push foward. But I think this time around Apple seems to think like all of you, that the Zune is not worth competing against. I remember how the Zune 16 basically forced the arrival of the iPod Nano 16GB, as we saw iPod Nano 4GBs get quickly discontinued.
To ignore the better specs like Radio, OLED and not implement them can work or this could be the time Microsoft goes ahead. And I think many of you also ignore that the Zune HD is also a testing ground for Windows Mobile 7. Sure Windows Mobile is now a failure for the most part... it was designed in 2000 as PocketPC 2000 and has had limited upgrades since then. The problem was Microsoft was not innovative beyond the original creation of the platform. Apple seems to be stepping on that same problem with the iPods in my opinion. Video Camera is just flash, and I was hoping for OLED or FM/HD Radio. Apple needs to innovate, and the LP stuff is great but Zune HDs have comparible stuff on the Zune device itself and for free. It should be the first with OLED, first with HD Radio, it should compete with Tegra because they we are really talking games.
The fact remains, beyond hardware and iTunes the biggest focus was games and Microsoft has a clear advantage in the expertise of the Xbox and its connections. Someone commented and misread that Sony was gonna help Microsoft. No, what I said was that Microsoft has taken exclusive after exclusive away from Sony, and that getting software titles to end up on a Microsoft Platform is one of Microsofts key skills.
I would go back and re-read those exact same tech blog sites like engadget. Not everyone was impressed about the new ipod touch today. It will sell well enough....but not everyone will buy. There are definitely customers who have changed their minds now because of the announcements.
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.
But anyways, this "production problem" for the ipod touch with camera will cost consumers an entire product cycle before we can see and use them. And here I was thinking that Apple was going to disaappoint by releasing an ipod touch with a camera but no GPS!
Geez, without the camera I've got no incentive to upgrade. And that is how Apple makes their money isn't it? ......with consumers upgrading.
Where is the mic on the Nano? Can it do voice recordings?
I would go back and re-read those exact same tech blog sites like engadget. Not everyone was impressed about the new ipod touch today. It will sell well enough....but not everyone will buy. There are definitely customers who have changed their minds now because of the announcements.
Seriously, if you own a 2G Touch why would you buy this? A huge mistake.
Comments
No internal mic.
No GPS.
No camera.
No 802.11n.
I will not be making a purchase.
rearden
That's makes sense but it should have been introduced like yesterday?
If it was I would be at the Apple Store yesterday.
I am disappointed. I wanted to get an ipod touch but there is little difference between 2nd and 3rd generation.
No internal mic.
No GPS.
No camera.
No 802.11n.
I will not be making a purchase.
rearden
what is the point of 802.11n when most people don't have broadband that fast?
I figured at the time it was not a big deal since progress often involves older models being left behind. But now Apple has retarded progress in exchange for profit margin by making the high volume G3 8GB touch using the old graphics hardware and software. Why develop for the higher capability OGL ES 2 while Apple keeps pumping out new hardware units that can't use it?
I suppose the camera decision was made for them by some problem with manufacturing but the bean counters must have made the decision that first generation graphics is good enough. OK, then there is no reason for me to bother upgrading.
I am disappointed. I wanted to get an ipod touch but there is little difference between 2nd and 3rd generation.
No internal mic.
No GPS.
No camera.
No 802.11n.
I will not be making a purchase.
rearden
Expect a stock decline - temporarily until the tab gets announce.
Apple has got me so ticked off, I'll probably put my energy into getting a 1-G iPhone cheap and forget buying these ho-hum iPod touches. That way, Apple won't get a penny and I'll probably save money.
I need a camera, and I need a mike and I don't want to pay AT&T fees. I also need them soon. I thought I would get that in the new touches. Instead, Apple is giving the tiny Nano more features but not the iPod touch. Why? With that tiny 2.2-inch Nano screen you can't see much of what you've taken and the equally tiny battery isn't likely to last long in video mode.
What's going on? If Apple has production problems with camera-equipped touches, they should say so, give us the details of new touch, and a release date. This cult of secrecy is such a pain. You'd think they were the Kremlin circa 1935. Both have a cult-like obsession with not admitting mistakes.
Still worse is the possibility that Apple wants to build high walls between its products, doling out features in odd ways to fit a marketing straight-jacket. The iPhone would be for work and business for those with the money. The touch is for games but not recreation, hence the lack of a camera and the boring length of game promotion today. Color touch users fat and flabby couch potatoes. The Nano is for mostly outdoor recreation (camera and Nike added), but has nothing that lets you get work done. If so, it's stupid move. Users don't want to klutz with 2-3 gadgets.
To add insult to injury, I just checked the specs on the new touches. The 8 gig model ships with the old-style earphones not the remote earphones and without a plastic dock adapter. Total saving for Apple? Probably about 25 to 50 cents. Cost to customers who don't want to pull their touch out of their pocket every time they pause music: $30 That stinks. Heck, even the cheap little $59 Shuttle ships with remote earphones. While Jobs was gone, the niggling little bean counters seem to have been running Apple. This is the unfortunate result.
I hate companies that treat their customers as if they were stupid, and that's precisely how I feel Apple is treating its customers now.
The one thing I've always abhorred before I switched to Mac are the segment of "elitist fanboi"ism associated with die-hard Mac users. Inkling is a clear example of this. I love my MacBook, I love my 32gb 2g iPod Touch and I lam a loyal Apple customer. I don't think they're treating me as if I was stupid. I had problems with my iTunes purchase and Apple took care of it within 24-48 hrs. Quit being such a whining little lamer.
Most people who want to stick with Verizon, Sprint, T-Mo, etc.. will do so because of a number of reasons including far cheaper/better plans, network coverage, discounts, and a host of other reasons. They could add a front and rear facing camera on the iPhone with 10 MP resolution, offer video chats, a 64GB drive, a hardware keyboard which I really prefer, triple the battery life and I would still not get an iPhone because that means switching to AT&T. I had AT&T before and the coverage where I live is abominable not to mention no 3G whatsoever.
The iPod Touch should be aimed at people like me that want an iPhone without the phone part. I will hand it to Apple, they are very clever about leaving out quite a lot on purpose so they can very gradually add these over time. It took them 3 tries to add video and MMS to the iPhone for example. They will still get my money, just later rather than sooner.
Now I am so glad I bought my iPhone 3GS with video. Something is wrong with this picture here. Was it the thinness of the Touch that was preventing this or the addition of a mic that AT&T balked at?
Anyone who owns last year's Touch will not upgrade for just this. This is not good.
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.
But anyways, this "production problem" for the ipod touch with camera will cost consumers an entire product cycle before we can see and use them. And here I was thinking that Apple was going to disaappoint by releasing an ipod touch with a camera but no GPS!
Geez, without the camera I've got no incentive to upgrade. And that is how Apple makes their money isn't it? ......with consumers upgrading.
Take a deep breath, folks.
As many have pointed out: (i) A Touch with all the bells and whistles will come, but only when it's ready and proper quality-wise, and can be priced right; (ii) It could well be an entry-level 'iTablet' when that is announced early next year; (iii) The ones intro'd today will substantially drop in price at that time, and completely kill off the Zunes et al (that's the reason Apple did not go all the way in lowering Touch prices - they want to take in a couple of more months of higher profit); (iv) They don't want to cannibalize the just-intro'd 3GS; (v) The real new product here is the Nano (what's not to like, with camera, video, FM....), and Apple thought that it needed some serious stand-alone attention, esp. with the back-to-school crowd that is looking for iPods at a lower price point.
And, thank you, Apple, for keeping the Classic and bumping up its specs for the same price!
For those of you who claim you are irredeemably p-o'd, go put your money where your conviction is and buy a Zune. And hope it comes with a camera. Bye.
Obviously you're angry but there's no need to lie. Zune HD is not cheaper. It also doesn't play games which is the primary use of the iPod touch.
Zune HD is cheaper. $219 for 16GB and $289 for 32GB. The iPod touch is 8GB for $199 and $299 for 32GB. Yes, you can get an iPod Touch 8GB for less, but overall the Zune HD is cheaper.
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2009/...ional-details/
Shows Zune HD with a games menu. Microsoft has also confirmed there will be games. Will there be as many good games as the iPod Touch, will they be better or worse quality? Only time will tell.
The least Apple could have done is brought FM Radio to its entire lineup.
There are pros and cons to both platforms as I see it, but to dismiss that Apple didn't miss the boat in the minds of many people today is wrong. Go read Engadget and other sites where people are saying this makes their decision and the decision is Zune HD.
Quit being fanbois, and actually have a proper discussion. Yes the old Zune have been overall failures, but Microsoft had a tendency to try, try, try again and then get it right. Even the original Xbox was statiscally better than the PS2, so the Zunes have had better pricing and specs (such as Radio, WiFi Sync) The Radio features and tagging songs is great, something that the iPod Nano has embraced. The Zune is good for Apple, it helps them push foward. But I think this time around Apple seems to think like all of you, that the Zune is not worth competing against. I remember how the Zune 16 basically forced the arrival of the iPod Nano 16GB, as we saw iPod Nano 4GBs get quickly discontinued.
To ignore the better specs like Radio, OLED and not implement them can work or this could be the time Microsoft goes ahead. And I think many of you also ignore that the Zune HD is also a testing ground for Windows Mobile 7. Sure Windows Mobile is now a failure for the most part... it was designed in 2000 as PocketPC 2000 and has had limited upgrades since then. The problem was Microsoft was not innovative beyond the original creation of the platform. Apple seems to be stepping on that same problem with the iPods in my opinion. Video Camera is just flash, and I was hoping for OLED or FM/HD Radio. Apple needs to innovate, and the LP stuff is great but Zune HDs have comparible stuff on the Zune device itself and for free. It should be the first with OLED, first with HD Radio, it should compete with Tegra because they we are really talking games.
The fact remains, beyond hardware and iTunes the biggest focus was games and Microsoft has a clear advantage in the expertise of the Xbox and its connections. Someone commented and misread that Sony was gonna help Microsoft. No, what I said was that Microsoft has taken exclusive after exclusive away from Sony, and that getting software titles to end up on a Microsoft Platform is one of Microsofts key skills.
Most people who want to stick with Verizon, Sprint, T-Mo, etc.. will do so because of a number of reasons .....
But one might note that the iPhone is none-the-worse for that.....
Obviously you're angry but there's no need to lie. Zune HD is not cheaper. It also doesn't play games which is the primary use of the iPod touch.
primary?
Zune HD is cheaper. $219 for 16GB and $289 for 32GB. The iPod touch is 8GB for $199 and $299 for 32GB. Yes, you can get an iPod Touch 8GB for less, but overall the Zune HD is cheaper.
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2009/...ional-details/
Shows Zune HD with a games menu. Microsoft has also confirmed there will be games. .........
Cool! Zune HD is out!? Where can I buy it?
Expect a stock decline
Well, it fell all of 1% (on a day that the NASDAQ fell by 0.64%). I suppose that is, technically, a decline....
Guess I'll have to get a Windows based netbook for my birthday.
Cool! Zune HD is out!? Where can I buy it?
No its not out... September 15th at Walmart, Bestbuy, Amazon, Newegg.
But I know your just being sarcastic and being a typical fanboi instead of having a mature discussion about why Apple should have included FM Radio and OLED. Why allow your competition to be better? Its not like the specs for the Zune have been secret (unlike Apple). Its been known for months it would have OLED and Tegra.
Zune HD is cheaper. $219 for 16GB and $289 for 32GB. The iPod touch is 8GB for $199 and $299 for 32GB. Yes, you can get an iPod Touch 8GB for less, but overall the Zune HD is cheaper.
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2009/...ional-details/
Shows Zune HD with a games menu. Microsoft has also confirmed there will be games. Will there be as many good games as the iPod Touch, will they be better or worse quality? Only time will tell.
The least Apple could have done is brought FM Radio to its entire lineup.
There are pros and cons to both platforms as I see it, but to dismiss that Apple didn't miss the boat in the minds of many people today is wrong. Go read Engadget and other sites where people are saying this makes their decision and the decision is Zune HD.
Quit being fanbois, and actually have a proper discussion. Yes the old Zune have been overall failures, but Microsoft had a tendency to try, try, try again and then get it right. Even the original Xbox was statiscally better than the PS2, so the Zunes have had better pricing and specs (such as Radio, WiFi Sync) The Radio features and tagging songs is great, something that the iPod Nano has embraced. The Zune is good for Apple, it helps them push foward. But I think this time around Apple seems to think like all of you, that the Zune is not worth competing against. I remember how the Zune 16 basically forced the arrival of the iPod Nano 16GB, as we saw iPod Nano 4GBs get quickly discontinued.
To ignore the better specs like Radio, OLED and not implement them can work or this could be the time Microsoft goes ahead. And I think many of you also ignore that the Zune HD is also a testing ground for Windows Mobile 7. Sure Windows Mobile is now a failure for the most part... it was designed in 2000 as PocketPC 2000 and has had limited upgrades since then. The problem was Microsoft was not innovative beyond the original creation of the platform. Apple seems to be stepping on that same problem with the iPods in my opinion. Video Camera is just flash, and I was hoping for OLED or FM/HD Radio. Apple needs to innovate, and the LP stuff is great but Zune HDs have comparible stuff on the Zune device itself and for free. It should be the first with OLED, first with HD Radio, it should compete with Tegra because they we are really talking games.
The fact remains, beyond hardware and iTunes the biggest focus was games and Microsoft has a clear advantage in the expertise of the Xbox and its connections. Someone commented and misread that Sony was gonna help Microsoft. No, what I said was that Microsoft has taken exclusive after exclusive away from Sony, and that getting software titles to end up on a Microsoft Platform is one of Microsofts key skills.
I would go back and re-read those exact same tech blog sites like engadget. Not everyone was impressed about the new ipod touch today. It will sell well enough....but not everyone will buy. There are definitely customers who have changed their minds now because of the announcements.
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.
But anyways, this "production problem" for the ipod touch with camera will cost consumers an entire product cycle before we can see and use them. And here I was thinking that Apple was going to disaappoint by releasing an ipod touch with a camera but no GPS!
Geez, without the camera I've got no incentive to upgrade. And that is how Apple makes their money isn't it? ......with consumers upgrading.
Where is the mic on the Nano? Can it do voice recordings?
I would go back and re-read those exact same tech blog sites like engadget. Not everyone was impressed about the new ipod touch today. It will sell well enough....but not everyone will buy. There are definitely customers who have changed their minds now because of the announcements.
Seriously, if you own a 2G Touch why would you buy this? A huge mistake.