How is that a "clever omission"? That's not a direct quote from Jobs. And as JLL pointed out, it amounts to the same thing as what I did quote him as saying.
I guess you also believe he's eating a lot of ice cream too.
You seriously believe everything the spinmeister tells you?
The reason to save a buck is pretty weak, even for Apple. I can?t imagine that the cost of the camera is much and if they had been able to secure enough of the component and had completed the assembly process and OS integration it would seem foolish to pull. This leads me to think it was purely technical.
The Nano and Touch are both iPods but they have very different OSes. It?s possible that they two teams that worked on each device were unsuccessful with the Touch but successful with the Nano. If they do offer a new Touch mid-cycle I think we can deduce that this was likely the case.
I think we can agree that the attempt to save a buck - if so - is pretty low.
The problem I have with the mfg error is that the camera has been long overdue on the iPod Touch already (IMHO, of course). 1st gen is an expected omission, 2nd gen is cheap but not offensive, 3rd gen is ridiculous. For a feature that has been such a long time coming, it is truly an unacceptable error to make.
I'm having trouble, internally, deciding whether Apple was stupidly irresponsible, or stupidly stingy.
There's absolutely no reason there shouldn't have been a camera on the iPod Touch and the "Gaming Device" BS was just a coverup for their own failure... or greed... you decide.
The fact is that the Nano got one and their beloved the iPhone got one (true video support anyway) so either it's a mfg error or an insulting up-sell to spite those who aren't stupid enough to buy more than they need or settle for the inferior 90%-profit-margin model.
I hope it isn't the latter, but if a Touch update comes and goes without a camera, we will all know which it is.
-Clive
I will never understand this line of thought.
Apple makes the products they do, with the features they have. They have their reasons. To the extent that those products and features conform to what their buyers want, they are successful in the marketplace and make Apple a lot of money. To the extent that they do not, they aren't and don't.
In the latter case, the onus is on Apple to correct their strategy as a matter of good business. Speculation regarding Apple's incompetence or greed doesn't really enter into it, as that misguidedly anthropomorphizes what is simply a business calculation-- just like every other manufacturer of goods that every was.
If enough buyers are sufficiently dismayed by the feature set of the iPod Touch so as to not buy it, then Apple will have a decision to make. Until then, railing against them for not making the device you want with the features you want, as if that were an ethical or moral failing, doesn't really make any sense.
The irony, of course, is that if the iPod Touch weren't extremely desirable, no one would care. They would just buy the other, more fully featured machine that met their needs. But instead the prevailing idea seems to be that Apple makes the device that everyone wants, so therefore it absolutely must have all the features a given buyer wants, so as to be "perfect" for that buyer.
For instance, you could always get a Zune HD, but it doesn't have a camera and it doesn't work with Macs. But most folks seem to be impressed with what it can do, rather than what it can't. I haven't seen anyone berating MS for being evil or stupid or incompetent for not putting a camera on the Zune HD, have you? There's a reason for that disparity in perceptions-- the Zune is an "anything but Apple, take it or leave it" device, whereas the Touch is what most people actually want. So it's hard to simultaneously argue that Apple is doing it wrong by making their devices so desirable as to be the obvious choice, but not quite good enough to be everything to everybody.
The reason to save a buck is pretty weak, even for Apple. I can?t imagine that the cost of the camera is much and if they had been able to secure enough of the component and had completed the assembly process and OS integration it would seem foolish to pull. This leads me to think it was purely technical.
The Nano and Touch are both iPods but they have very different OSes. It?s possible that they two teams that worked on each device were unsuccessful with the Touch but successful with the Nano. If they do offer a new Touch mid-cycle I think we can deduce that this was likely the case.
I'm firmly of the belief that it was purely a technical issue. The fact that the iPhone OS and hardware supports both still and video photography seems to suggest it was a problem with the specific camera module they wanted to use. Rumors that it was a "bad batch" of modules would also suggest that it was not Apple's intent to use the same camera in the Nano as in the touch. Otherwise both would have been affected.
I think the problem was that a vendor told Apple they could deliver a module that offered both decent still resolution (maybe not as high as the iPhone's) and SD video in a package that would fit in the thin touch case. They probably even supplied some low-volume samples for Apple's systems integration testing. But when it came time to ramp up production, they found that it was impossible to maintain quality given the space contraints. So either the parts didn't fit in the space provided, or the image quality was crap. And as we all know, Steve won't deliver crap, so the camera was yanked.
And if a touch is released in the spring with the Nano's SD video-only camara, it will reinforce my belief that the only way to get a good camera in the touch is to make it thicker. So a spring update will be just to buy time until they can redesign the touch for it's normal Fall update, and it will debut a slightly thicker case.
I had hoped the 3rd generation touch would come with the same camera that's in the iPhone. Now I know that's technically impossible because the case is too thin so my interest in having a camera in the touch is gone.
The feature I'm waiting for now is 128GB capacity so I can carry my entire music library. I currently have no music on my touch because it's too much of a pain to pick and choose songs. I have an older shuffle that does random selections by default so I use that for music and use the touch for apps, photos and podcasts.
Apple makes the products they do, with the features they have. They have their reasons. To the extent that those products and features conform to what their buyers want, they are successful in the marketplace and make Apple a lot of money. To the extent that they do not, they aren't and don't.
In the latter case, the onus is on Apple to correct their strategy as a matter of good business. Speculation regarding Apple's incompetence or greed doesn't really enter into it, as that misguidedly anthropomorphizes what is simply a business calculation-- just like every other manufacturer of goods that every was.
If enough buyers are sufficiently dismayed by the feature set of the iPod Touch so as to not buy it, then Apple will have a decision to make. Until then, railing against them for not making the device you want with the features you want, as if that were an ethical or moral failing, doesn't really make any sense.
The irony, of course, is that if the iPod Touch weren't extremely desirable, no one would care. They would just buy the other, more fully featured machine that met their needs. But instead the prevailing idea seems to be that Apple makes the device that everyone wants, so therefore it absolutely must have all the features a given buyer wants, so as to be "perfect" for that buyer.
For instance, you could always get a Zune HD, but it doesn't have a camera and it doesn't work with Macs. But most folks seem to be impressed with what it can do, rather than what it can't. I haven't seen anyone berating MS for being evil or stupid or incompetent for not putting a camera on the Zune HD, have you? There's a reason for that disparity in perceptions-- the Zune is an "anything but Apple, take it or leave it" device, whereas the Touch is what most people actually want. So it's hard to simultaneously argue that Apple is doing it wrong by making their devices so desirable as to be the obvious choice, but not quite good enough to be everything to everybody.
I had hoped the 3rd generation touch would come with the same camera that's in the iPhone. Now I know that's technically impossible because the case is too thin so my interest in having a camera in the touch is gone.
The feature I'm waiting for now is 128GB capacity so I can carry my entire music library. I currently have no music on my touch because it's too much of a pain to pick and choose songs. I have an older shuffle that does random selections by default so I use that for music and use the touch for apps, photos and podcasts.
If they increased the width slightly , added a kick-ass camera and a flash- wouldn't you want that?
I'm firmly of the belief that it was purely a technical issue. The fact that the iPhone OS and hardware supports both still and video photography seems to suggest it was a problem with the specific camera module they wanted to use. Rumors that it was a "bad batch" of modules would also suggest that it was not Apple's intent to use the same camera in the Nano as in the touch. Otherwise both would have been affected.
I think the problem was that a vendor told Apple they could deliver a module that offered both decent still resolution (maybe not as high as the iPhone's) and SD video in a package that would fit in the thin touch case. They probably even supplied some low-volume samples for Apple's systems integration testing. But when it came time to ramp up production, they found that it was impossible to maintain quality given the space contraints. So either the parts didn't fit in the space provided, or the image quality was crap. And as we all know, Steve won't deliver crap, so the camera was yanked.
And if a touch is released in the spring with the Nano's SD video-only camara, it will reinforce my belief that the only way to get a good camera in the touch is to make it thicker. So a spring update will be just to buy time until they can redesign the touch for it's normal Fall update, and it will debut a slightly thicker case.
Or AT&T nixed it cause it would violate their contract with Apple by turning it into a hand held all in one skype phone.
i really wish that apple would replace the silver backing of the touch with a black plastic casing instead. the aluminum or whatever it is now scratches way too easily. I also wouldn't mind if the whole front of the touch was just a screen. There is too much empty space between the top and bottom of the screen to the top and bottom edges of the touch. I dont know how useful a camera would be on a touch when you can just use your phone. gps and compass would be nice though.
i really wish that apple would replace the silver backing of the touch with a black plastic casing instead. the aluminum or whatever it is now scratches way too easily. I also wouldn't mind if the whole front of the touch was just a screen. There is too much empty space between the top and bottom of the screen to the top and bottom edges of the touch. I dont know how useful a camera would be on a touch when you can just use your phone. gps and compass would be nice though.
Stop whining- that's Apple planned obsolescence program in action- your iPod only looks good 9 months at most then its time to buy a new one. Either buy a case or a new iPod- simple.
I have been waiting to get an iPod Touch since about May. I was waiting for the 3rd gen iPod Touch to come out, but I decided not to buy one in September with all the rumors that a camera was still coming to the Touch in the near future. I currently do not have an iPod right now, so I am a little itchy to get one. However, I would be a little disgusted if I bought an Touch right now, and then Apple came out with a camera in the near future. I do really want a camera on it, since my cell phone does not have one. Do you suggest I get the Touch soon (by Christmas) or wait for the camera? I have to say that I really don't think Apple will put a camera in the Touch until the traditional September iPod refresh next year...they will just end up aggravating a lot of customers who already purchased the current camera-less Touch. Also, I'm not sure how many people are actually holding back from buying the current iPod Touch just because it doesn't have a camera. I wanted to get your opinions though.
Apple makes the products they do, with the features they have. They have their reasons. To the extent that those products and features conform to what their buyers want, they are successful in the marketplace and make Apple a lot of money. To the extent that they do not, they aren't and don't.
In the latter case, the onus is on Apple to correct their strategy as a matter of good business. Speculation regarding Apple's incompetence or greed doesn't really enter into it, as that misguidedly anthropomorphizes what is simply a business calculation-- just like every other manufacturer of goods that every was.
If enough buyers are sufficiently dismayed by the feature set of the iPod Touch so as to not buy it, then Apple will have a decision to make. Until then, railing against them for not making the device you want with the features you want, as if that were an ethical or moral failing, doesn't really make any sense.
The irony, of course, is that if the iPod Touch weren't extremely desirable, no one would care. They would just buy the other, more fully featured machine that met their needs. But instead the prevailing idea seems to be that Apple makes the device that everyone wants, so therefore it absolutely must have all the features a given buyer wants, so as to be "perfect" for that buyer.
For instance, you could always get a Zune HD, but it doesn't have a camera and it doesn't work with Macs. But most folks seem to be impressed with what it can do, rather than what it can't. I haven't seen anyone berating MS for being evil or stupid or incompetent for not putting a camera on the Zune HD, have you? There's a reason for that disparity in perceptions-- the Zune is an "anything but Apple, take it or leave it" device, whereas the Touch is what most people actually want. So it's hard to simultaneously argue that Apple is doing it wrong by making their devices so desirable as to be the obvious choice, but not quite good enough to be everything to everybody.
*sigh*
You can try to pretend like this is a notion that contradicts mine, but it is not. I know how business works, and I'm not critiquing Apple's success in the marketplace, as that is self-evident.
All your wall of text has managed to do is increase the perception that Apple cares more about the buck than they do leading the marketplace ("skating to where the puck is going"). Of course, doing so is their own prerogative, and probably in the best interest of their shareholders, but in the end, it's insulting to the consumer... at least those who, like me, know better.
I have been waiting to get an iPod Touch since about May. I was waiting for the 3rd gen iPod Touch to come out, but I decided not to buy one in September with all the rumors that a camera was still coming to the Touch in the near future. I currently do not have an iPod right now, so I am a little itchy to get one. However, I would be a little disgusted if I bought an Touch right now, and then Apple came out with a camera in the near future. I do really want a camera on it, since my cell phone does not have one. Do you suggest I get the Touch soon (by Christmas) or wait for the camera? I have to say that I really don't think Apple will put a camera in the Touch until the traditional September iPod refresh next year...they will just end up aggravating a lot of customers who already purchased the current camera-less Touch. Also, I'm not sure how many people are actually holding back from buying the current iPod Touch just because it doesn't have a camera. I wanted to get your opinions though.
Thanks!!! I'd really appreciate any advice.
The best time to buy any Apple product is right after they come out, especially their Macs since by the end of the cycle they simply aren?t a financial bargain compared to other PC vendors. However, the iPod line is a little more tricky since Apple has a majority share in this area. The next best thing to the Touch is the Zune HD and many simply don?t even consider that a real option.
If you want a camera in an iPod now then you can always get the cheaper Nano. if the video camera is the main feature you wanted then that should suffice since the space in the Touch is the same size as in the Nano which means that Apple was likely going to use the same component in both. If you want the other features of the Touch and can?t or won?t get an iPhone then I suggest just waiting until the Touch does get a camera. By then it might actually be able to take still photos and be better quality than the Nano?s camera.
I have been waiting to get an iPod Touch since about May...
After the 3rd gen debuted sans camera, I bought a 2nd gen refurb, which I intend to resell when the camera model comes out. iPods retain their value pretty well, so it's a small investment in order to have the convenience of an iPod... or in my case, my substitute car radio. Gotta get that thing fixed....
All your wall of text has managed to do is increase the perception that Apple cares more about the buck than they do leading the marketplace ("skating to where the puck is going"). Of course, doing so is their own prerogative, and probably in the best interest of their shareholders
This is how Apple has always operated and how every for profit company should operate. Unfortunately for you in this instance the consumers tend to what Apple is selling so there is no reason for them to alter their course. I’m not going to look back through the posts to see exactly what you expected from Apple but I’d wager it’s either a niche feature or something they likely couldn’t complete in time for the release, like the camera.
The best time to buy any Apple product is right after they come out, especially their Macs since by the end of the cycle they simply aren’t a financial bargain compared to other PC vendors. However, the iPod line is a little more tricky since Apple has a majority share in this area. The next best thing to the Touch is the Zune HD and many simply don’t even consider that a real option.
If you want a camera in an iPod now then you can always get the cheaper Nano. if the video camera is the main feature you wanted then that should suffice since the space in the Touch is the same size as in the Nano which means that Apple was likely going to use the same component in both. If you want the other features of the Touch and can’t or won’t get an iPhone then I suggest just waiting until the Touch does get a camera. By then it might actually be able to take still photos and be better quality than the Nano’s camera.
Thanks! The main reasons I want the iPod Touch are the other features, primarily the apps. That is why I'm not really considering a Zune HD. Also, I had an Nano once, and I really wanted the bigger screen that the Touch has. You suggest waiting until the Touch gets a camera. When do you think this will happen? If it won't happen for a long time, I will buy something to hold me over, like Clive At Five suggested. Otherwise, I can wait.
This is how Apple has always operated and how every for profit company should operate. Unfortunately for you in this instance the consumers tend to what Apple is selling so there is no reason for them to alter their course. I?m not going to look back through the posts to see exactly what you expected from Apple but I?d wager it?s either a niche feature or something they likely couldn?t complete in time for the release, like the camera.
zzz.... you're repeating what addabox said and I myself acknowledged! Business is business! I know that. I'm just criticizing what I think is a bad business decision!
A camera is not a niche feature, not should it have been such an impassible hurdle, since they've been pairing it with the same technology profile in the iPhone since '07, and have shown that they can fit it in a skinny spatial profile like the iPod Nano. The two barriers to adding the feature have been conquered... Like your best bud Teckstud said, "Just add a camera to it. Not that big a deal."
A camera is not a niche feature, not should it have been such an impassible hurdle, since they've been pairing it with the same technology profile in the iPhone since '07, and have shown that they can fit it in a skinny spatial profile like the iPod Nano.
They have never added that camera to a device running iPhone OS. Your theory that Apple went through all the trouble to include a space for the video camera than matches the iPod Nano but then yanked it at the last minute has conspiracy theory written all over it. It makes no sense.
They have never added that camera to a device running iPhone OS. Your theory that Apple went through all the trouble to include a space for the video camera than matches the iPod Nano but then yanked it at the last minute has conspiracy theory written all over it. It makes no sense.
Dude, read my earlier posts. I'm not saying it wasn't a mfg error, I'm saying that if it WAS a mfg error, given the lead time Apple has had to prepare for adding a camera to the iPod Touch, it shouldn't have happened. No conspiracy involved, just poor execution.
Dude, read my earlier posts. I'm not saying it wasn't a mfg error, I'm saying that if it WAS a mfg error, given the lead time Apple has had to prepare for adding a camera to the iPod Touch, it shouldn't have happened. No conspiracy involved, just poor execution.
-Clive
The MobileMe release on top of the 3G and v3.0 release with a free trial for any and everyone without requiring a creditcard like they do now was poor execution.
The more recent 1.5Gbps SATA later updated to 3Gbps and still unable to use many 3rd-party drives effectively because of some proprietary connector configuration is poor execution.
Apple makes mistakes but rarely do we see them since they keep so much hidden. If not for the space that exactly fits the iPod Nano?s video camera or the inclusion of the camera in the Nano we would have never known about the Touch?s camera and would not have been speculating on why it never came. I don?t disagree that Apple makes mistakes I thought were saying that Apple shouldn?t make mistakes.
Comments
How is that a "clever omission"? That's not a direct quote from Jobs. And as JLL pointed out, it amounts to the same thing as what I did quote him as saying.
I guess you also believe he's eating a lot of ice cream too.
You seriously believe everything the spinmeister tells you?
The reason to save a buck is pretty weak, even for Apple. I can?t imagine that the cost of the camera is much and if they had been able to secure enough of the component and had completed the assembly process and OS integration it would seem foolish to pull. This leads me to think it was purely technical.
The Nano and Touch are both iPods but they have very different OSes. It?s possible that they two teams that worked on each device were unsuccessful with the Touch but successful with the Nano. If they do offer a new Touch mid-cycle I think we can deduce that this was likely the case.
I think we can agree that the attempt to save a buck - if so - is pretty low.
The problem I have with the mfg error is that the camera has been long overdue on the iPod Touch already (IMHO, of course). 1st gen is an expected omission, 2nd gen is cheap but not offensive, 3rd gen is ridiculous. For a feature that has been such a long time coming, it is truly an unacceptable error to make.
I'm having trouble, internally, deciding whether Apple was stupidly irresponsible, or stupidly stingy.
-Clive
I'm with you on this one, Teckstud.
There's absolutely no reason there shouldn't have been a camera on the iPod Touch and the "Gaming Device" BS was just a coverup for their own failure... or greed... you decide.
The fact is that the Nano got one and their beloved the iPhone got one (true video support anyway) so either it's a mfg error or an insulting up-sell to spite those who aren't stupid enough to buy more than they need or settle for the inferior 90%-profit-margin model.
I hope it isn't the latter, but if a Touch update comes and goes without a camera, we will all know which it is.
-Clive
I will never understand this line of thought.
Apple makes the products they do, with the features they have. They have their reasons. To the extent that those products and features conform to what their buyers want, they are successful in the marketplace and make Apple a lot of money. To the extent that they do not, they aren't and don't.
In the latter case, the onus is on Apple to correct their strategy as a matter of good business. Speculation regarding Apple's incompetence or greed doesn't really enter into it, as that misguidedly anthropomorphizes what is simply a business calculation-- just like every other manufacturer of goods that every was.
If enough buyers are sufficiently dismayed by the feature set of the iPod Touch so as to not buy it, then Apple will have a decision to make. Until then, railing against them for not making the device you want with the features you want, as if that were an ethical or moral failing, doesn't really make any sense.
The irony, of course, is that if the iPod Touch weren't extremely desirable, no one would care. They would just buy the other, more fully featured machine that met their needs. But instead the prevailing idea seems to be that Apple makes the device that everyone wants, so therefore it absolutely must have all the features a given buyer wants, so as to be "perfect" for that buyer.
For instance, you could always get a Zune HD, but it doesn't have a camera and it doesn't work with Macs. But most folks seem to be impressed with what it can do, rather than what it can't. I haven't seen anyone berating MS for being evil or stupid or incompetent for not putting a camera on the Zune HD, have you? There's a reason for that disparity in perceptions-- the Zune is an "anything but Apple, take it or leave it" device, whereas the Touch is what most people actually want. So it's hard to simultaneously argue that Apple is doing it wrong by making their devices so desirable as to be the obvious choice, but not quite good enough to be everything to everybody.
The reason to save a buck is pretty weak, even for Apple. I can?t imagine that the cost of the camera is much and if they had been able to secure enough of the component and had completed the assembly process and OS integration it would seem foolish to pull. This leads me to think it was purely technical.
The Nano and Touch are both iPods but they have very different OSes. It?s possible that they two teams that worked on each device were unsuccessful with the Touch but successful with the Nano. If they do offer a new Touch mid-cycle I think we can deduce that this was likely the case.
I'm firmly of the belief that it was purely a technical issue. The fact that the iPhone OS and hardware supports both still and video photography seems to suggest it was a problem with the specific camera module they wanted to use. Rumors that it was a "bad batch" of modules would also suggest that it was not Apple's intent to use the same camera in the Nano as in the touch. Otherwise both would have been affected.
I think the problem was that a vendor told Apple they could deliver a module that offered both decent still resolution (maybe not as high as the iPhone's) and SD video in a package that would fit in the thin touch case. They probably even supplied some low-volume samples for Apple's systems integration testing. But when it came time to ramp up production, they found that it was impossible to maintain quality given the space contraints. So either the parts didn't fit in the space provided, or the image quality was crap. And as we all know, Steve won't deliver crap, so the camera was yanked.
And if a touch is released in the spring with the Nano's SD video-only camara, it will reinforce my belief that the only way to get a good camera in the touch is to make it thicker. So a spring update will be just to buy time until they can redesign the touch for it's normal Fall update, and it will debut a slightly thicker case.
The feature I'm waiting for now is 128GB capacity so I can carry my entire music library. I currently have no music on my touch because it's too much of a pain to pick and choose songs. I have an older shuffle that does random selections by default so I use that for music and use the touch for apps, photos and podcasts.
I will never understand this line of thought.
Apple makes the products they do, with the features they have. They have their reasons. To the extent that those products and features conform to what their buyers want, they are successful in the marketplace and make Apple a lot of money. To the extent that they do not, they aren't and don't.
In the latter case, the onus is on Apple to correct their strategy as a matter of good business. Speculation regarding Apple's incompetence or greed doesn't really enter into it, as that misguidedly anthropomorphizes what is simply a business calculation-- just like every other manufacturer of goods that every was.
If enough buyers are sufficiently dismayed by the feature set of the iPod Touch so as to not buy it, then Apple will have a decision to make. Until then, railing against them for not making the device you want with the features you want, as if that were an ethical or moral failing, doesn't really make any sense.
The irony, of course, is that if the iPod Touch weren't extremely desirable, no one would care. They would just buy the other, more fully featured machine that met their needs. But instead the prevailing idea seems to be that Apple makes the device that everyone wants, so therefore it absolutely must have all the features a given buyer wants, so as to be "perfect" for that buyer.
For instance, you could always get a Zune HD, but it doesn't have a camera and it doesn't work with Macs. But most folks seem to be impressed with what it can do, rather than what it can't. I haven't seen anyone berating MS for being evil or stupid or incompetent for not putting a camera on the Zune HD, have you? There's a reason for that disparity in perceptions-- the Zune is an "anything but Apple, take it or leave it" device, whereas the Touch is what most people actually want. So it's hard to simultaneously argue that Apple is doing it wrong by making their devices so desirable as to be the obvious choice, but not quite good enough to be everything to everybody.
Just add a camera to it.
Not that big a deal.
I had hoped the 3rd generation touch would come with the same camera that's in the iPhone. Now I know that's technically impossible because the case is too thin so my interest in having a camera in the touch is gone.
The feature I'm waiting for now is 128GB capacity so I can carry my entire music library. I currently have no music on my touch because it's too much of a pain to pick and choose songs. I have an older shuffle that does random selections by default so I use that for music and use the touch for apps, photos and podcasts.
If they increased the width slightly , added a kick-ass camera and a flash- wouldn't you want that?
I'm firmly of the belief that it was purely a technical issue. The fact that the iPhone OS and hardware supports both still and video photography seems to suggest it was a problem with the specific camera module they wanted to use. Rumors that it was a "bad batch" of modules would also suggest that it was not Apple's intent to use the same camera in the Nano as in the touch. Otherwise both would have been affected.
I think the problem was that a vendor told Apple they could deliver a module that offered both decent still resolution (maybe not as high as the iPhone's) and SD video in a package that would fit in the thin touch case. They probably even supplied some low-volume samples for Apple's systems integration testing. But when it came time to ramp up production, they found that it was impossible to maintain quality given the space contraints. So either the parts didn't fit in the space provided, or the image quality was crap. And as we all know, Steve won't deliver crap, so the camera was yanked.
And if a touch is released in the spring with the Nano's SD video-only camara, it will reinforce my belief that the only way to get a good camera in the touch is to make it thicker. So a spring update will be just to buy time until they can redesign the touch for it's normal Fall update, and it will debut a slightly thicker case.
Or AT&T nixed it cause it would violate their contract with Apple by turning it into a hand held all in one skype phone.
i really wish that apple would replace the silver backing of the touch with a black plastic casing instead. the aluminum or whatever it is now scratches way too easily. I also wouldn't mind if the whole front of the touch was just a screen. There is too much empty space between the top and bottom of the screen to the top and bottom edges of the touch. I dont know how useful a camera would be on a touch when you can just use your phone. gps and compass would be nice though.
Stop whining- that's Apple planned obsolescence program in action- your iPod only looks good 9 months at most then its time to buy a new one. Either buy a case or a new iPod- simple.
Thanks!!! I'd really appreciate any advice.
I will never understand this line of thought.
Apple makes the products they do, with the features they have. They have their reasons. To the extent that those products and features conform to what their buyers want, they are successful in the marketplace and make Apple a lot of money. To the extent that they do not, they aren't and don't.
In the latter case, the onus is on Apple to correct their strategy as a matter of good business. Speculation regarding Apple's incompetence or greed doesn't really enter into it, as that misguidedly anthropomorphizes what is simply a business calculation-- just like every other manufacturer of goods that every was.
If enough buyers are sufficiently dismayed by the feature set of the iPod Touch so as to not buy it, then Apple will have a decision to make. Until then, railing against them for not making the device you want with the features you want, as if that were an ethical or moral failing, doesn't really make any sense.
The irony, of course, is that if the iPod Touch weren't extremely desirable, no one would care. They would just buy the other, more fully featured machine that met their needs. But instead the prevailing idea seems to be that Apple makes the device that everyone wants, so therefore it absolutely must have all the features a given buyer wants, so as to be "perfect" for that buyer.
For instance, you could always get a Zune HD, but it doesn't have a camera and it doesn't work with Macs. But most folks seem to be impressed with what it can do, rather than what it can't. I haven't seen anyone berating MS for being evil or stupid or incompetent for not putting a camera on the Zune HD, have you? There's a reason for that disparity in perceptions-- the Zune is an "anything but Apple, take it or leave it" device, whereas the Touch is what most people actually want. So it's hard to simultaneously argue that Apple is doing it wrong by making their devices so desirable as to be the obvious choice, but not quite good enough to be everything to everybody.
*sigh*
You can try to pretend like this is a notion that contradicts mine, but it is not. I know how business works, and I'm not critiquing Apple's success in the marketplace, as that is self-evident.
All your wall of text has managed to do is increase the perception that Apple cares more about the buck than they do leading the marketplace ("skating to where the puck is going"). Of course, doing so is their own prerogative, and probably in the best interest of their shareholders, but in the end, it's insulting to the consumer... at least those who, like me, know better.
-Clive
I have been waiting to get an iPod Touch since about May. I was waiting for the 3rd gen iPod Touch to come out, but I decided not to buy one in September with all the rumors that a camera was still coming to the Touch in the near future. I currently do not have an iPod right now, so I am a little itchy to get one. However, I would be a little disgusted if I bought an Touch right now, and then Apple came out with a camera in the near future. I do really want a camera on it, since my cell phone does not have one. Do you suggest I get the Touch soon (by Christmas) or wait for the camera? I have to say that I really don't think Apple will put a camera in the Touch until the traditional September iPod refresh next year...they will just end up aggravating a lot of customers who already purchased the current camera-less Touch. Also, I'm not sure how many people are actually holding back from buying the current iPod Touch just because it doesn't have a camera. I wanted to get your opinions though.
Thanks!!! I'd really appreciate any advice.
The best time to buy any Apple product is right after they come out, especially their Macs since by the end of the cycle they simply aren?t a financial bargain compared to other PC vendors. However, the iPod line is a little more tricky since Apple has a majority share in this area. The next best thing to the Touch is the Zune HD and many simply don?t even consider that a real option.
If you want a camera in an iPod now then you can always get the cheaper Nano. if the video camera is the main feature you wanted then that should suffice since the space in the Touch is the same size as in the Nano which means that Apple was likely going to use the same component in both. If you want the other features of the Touch and can?t or won?t get an iPhone then I suggest just waiting until the Touch does get a camera. By then it might actually be able to take still photos and be better quality than the Nano?s camera.
I have been waiting to get an iPod Touch since about May...
After the 3rd gen debuted sans camera, I bought a 2nd gen refurb, which I intend to resell when the camera model comes out. iPods retain their value pretty well, so it's a small investment in order to have the convenience of an iPod... or in my case, my substitute car radio. Gotta get that thing fixed....
All your wall of text has managed to do is increase the perception that Apple cares more about the buck than they do leading the marketplace ("skating to where the puck is going"). Of course, doing so is their own prerogative, and probably in the best interest of their shareholders
This is how Apple has always operated and how every for profit company should operate. Unfortunately for you in this instance the consumers tend to what Apple is selling so there is no reason for them to alter their course. I’m not going to look back through the posts to see exactly what you expected from Apple but I’d wager it’s either a niche feature or something they likely couldn’t complete in time for the release, like the camera.
The best time to buy any Apple product is right after they come out, especially their Macs since by the end of the cycle they simply aren’t a financial bargain compared to other PC vendors. However, the iPod line is a little more tricky since Apple has a majority share in this area. The next best thing to the Touch is the Zune HD and many simply don’t even consider that a real option.
If you want a camera in an iPod now then you can always get the cheaper Nano. if the video camera is the main feature you wanted then that should suffice since the space in the Touch is the same size as in the Nano which means that Apple was likely going to use the same component in both. If you want the other features of the Touch and can’t or won’t get an iPhone then I suggest just waiting until the Touch does get a camera. By then it might actually be able to take still photos and be better quality than the Nano’s camera.
Thanks! The main reasons I want the iPod Touch are the other features, primarily the apps. That is why I'm not really considering a Zune HD. Also, I had an Nano once, and I really wanted the bigger screen that the Touch has. You suggest waiting until the Touch gets a camera. When do you think this will happen? If it won't happen for a long time, I will buy something to hold me over, like Clive At Five suggested. Otherwise, I can wait.
This is how Apple has always operated and how every for profit company should operate. Unfortunately for you in this instance the consumers tend to what Apple is selling so there is no reason for them to alter their course. I?m not going to look back through the posts to see exactly what you expected from Apple but I?d wager it?s either a niche feature or something they likely couldn?t complete in time for the release, like the camera.
zzz.... you're repeating what addabox said and I myself acknowledged! Business is business! I know that. I'm just criticizing what I think is a bad business decision!
A camera is not a niche feature, not should it have been such an impassible hurdle, since they've been pairing it with the same technology profile in the iPhone since '07, and have shown that they can fit it in a skinny spatial profile like the iPod Nano. The two barriers to adding the feature have been conquered... Like your best bud Teckstud said, "Just add a camera to it. Not that big a deal."
-Clive
A camera is not a niche feature, not should it have been such an impassible hurdle, since they've been pairing it with the same technology profile in the iPhone since '07, and have shown that they can fit it in a skinny spatial profile like the iPod Nano.
They have never added that camera to a device running iPhone OS. Your theory that Apple went through all the trouble to include a space for the video camera than matches the iPod Nano but then yanked it at the last minute has conspiracy theory written all over it. It makes no sense.
They have never added that camera to a device running iPhone OS. Your theory that Apple went through all the trouble to include a space for the video camera than matches the iPod Nano but then yanked it at the last minute has conspiracy theory written all over it. It makes no sense.
Dude, read my earlier posts. I'm not saying it wasn't a mfg error, I'm saying that if it WAS a mfg error, given the lead time Apple has had to prepare for adding a camera to the iPod Touch, it shouldn't have happened. No conspiracy involved, just poor execution.
-Clive
Dude, read my earlier posts. I'm not saying it wasn't a mfg error, I'm saying that if it WAS a mfg error, given the lead time Apple has had to prepare for adding a camera to the iPod Touch, it shouldn't have happened. No conspiracy involved, just poor execution.
-Clive
The MobileMe release on top of the 3G and v3.0 release with a free trial for any and everyone without requiring a creditcard like they do now was poor execution.
The more recent 1.5Gbps SATA later updated to 3Gbps and still unable to use many 3rd-party drives effectively because of some proprietary connector configuration is poor execution.
Apple makes mistakes but rarely do we see them since they keep so much hidden. If not for the space that exactly fits the iPod Nano?s video camera or the inclusion of the camera in the Nano we would have never known about the Touch?s camera and would not have been speculating on why it never came. I don?t disagree that Apple makes mistakes I thought were saying that Apple shouldn?t make mistakes.