So I got chastised for calling this overpriced when it was announced (mainly because it had "retina display" that we now find out is cheaper quality). Can we call it overpriced now?
This should have been $229 (and maybe even just 16gb to justify price)
The Mini should have been $299
And Apple would have sold tons more of both (and although smaller margins on both- the quantity would have more than made up for it).
I guess we'll have to wait until fall of 2013 for the $299 iPad mini, when they can drop the price of the iPod Touch to where it should have been originally ($199 or $229).
Touches are used by a surprising number of adults. Especially in business as it works well for E-Mail and calendar. So it will be with the Mini, I expect really strong sales to business users.
As to what Steve said, people really need to get over the fact that he was a salesman first and foremost. A good salesman sells what he has at the moment.
Will these new minis be Easter egg colored like the new iPod Touches?
I ask because the Tweenies are the obvious market for this as no adult would want or need a smaller iPad- Steve said so himself.
Basically what solipsismX wants is a cheap android tablet with an apple logo on it, but more expensive because it's apple (and that as valor) and because of iOS.
You're twisting his intent. Don't make him look like the enemy because you disagree with him.
So I got chastised for calling this overpriced when it was announced (mainly because it had "retina display" that we now find out is cheaper quality). Can we call it overpriced now?
This should have been $229 (and maybe even just 16gb to justify price)
The Mini should have been $299
And Apple would have sold tons more of both (and although smaller margins on both- the quantity would have more than made up for it).
I guess we'll have to wait until fall of 2013 for the $299 iPad mini, when they can drop the price of the iPod Touch to where it should have been originally ($199 or $229).
Old Touches had TN displays, the new ones are IPS. That's a considerable improvement right there. I think it's 80-85% of the latest iPhone for 50% of the real price, the phone service subsidy significantly distorts the apparent price of phones.
Non sense, using this logic the iPhone and Touch would be useless.
As for the UI developers can tailor their apps anyway they want to support the screen. Beyond that iOS has been significant improved to make some of the UI elements mailable, many apps will run just fine on the new Mini. For developers actively involved in iOS development it should be rather obvious to them where Apple is going as such their apps should be designed from the ground up to require a minimal of tweaking on a new screen.
Honestly this obsession with the screen size of the Mini and the supposed problems is garbage. It is a different device for a different need. People that dismiss the idea of the Min based on size mis the fact that many people are buying smaller devices because they are in fact smaller.
I was thinking the same thing just this morning when I was reading a book on the iPad.
Apple's fancy skeuomorphic book in iBooks, with the page edges etc. would steal a huge amount of screen real estate from a 7.85" iPad mini. Without a redesign, iPad mini wouldn't actually be that great as a book reader. A full-screen, non-skeuomorphic design would be better in this case for sure.
I have the feeling that the first rush of reports on the mini will be favourable, but the following week will be full of articles pointing out problems with the UI and how iOS 6 is awful etc.
Help us Scott Forestall, you are our only hope! <i style="font-family:sans-serif;line-height:19px;">[looks to the side quickly, then crouches to end the message]</i>
The best statement so far in this thread! IOS loves its RAM. You have to suspect this is done on purpose both to keep price low and to make iPhone more desirable.
Not sure I understand the more desirable comment. A customer walks into an Apple store to buy an iPod, upon learning that it has 512 mb of ram, they instead opt for a phone?
If that's what Apple has planned for a smaller iPad why bother?
Because the mini-tablet will likely replace the Touch. It's hard for me to imagine an ecosystem where parents are giving their old iPhones to their kids to use basically as a Touch, or kids getting new "free" subsidized iPhones, or used ones off eBay for less than the cost of a Touch, who would still want to buy a new Touch when it is so limited. Therefore, since most of the people who would buy a Touch are buying cheap smartphones instead, the Touch makes more sense as a small tablet ... Still portable, but better for games, movies, books and Internet, but still sold for the same price. And it will do something better than any tablet out there, or the Touch, because its Apple and they won't make a product merely to compete with Google.
Non sense, using this logic the iPhone and Touch would be useless.
As for the UI developers can tailor their apps anyway they want to support the screen. Beyond that iOS has been significant improved to make some of the UI elements mailable, many apps will run just fine on the new Mini. For developers actively involved in iOS development it should be rather obvious to them where Apple is going as such their apps should be designed from the ground up to require a minimal of tweaking on a new screen.
Honestly this obsession with the screen size of the Mini and the supposed problems is garbage. It is a different device for a different need. People that dismiss the idea of the Min based on size mis the fact that many people are buying smaller devices because they are in fact smaller.
It's another set of logistical concerns that does need to be addressed. I think there is considerable value in keeping the number of supported resolutions down, for Apple and for third party developers. If it needs to behave like a third (or fourth) category of iOS devices, then that's a potential problem.
So I got chastised for calling this overpriced when it was announced (mainly because it had "retina display" that we now find out is cheaper quality). Can we call it overpriced now?
No we can't. Why, because you would be hard pressed to find a device of equivalent quality at a similar or lower price. I mean really if you can find a similar device, with the same base features, at a dramtically lower price then you might have an argument.
This should have been $229 (and maybe even just 16gb to justify price)
The Mini should have been $299
I'm not going to jump to Mini pricing conclusions until the device is actually delivered.
And Apple would have sold tons more of both (and although smaller margins on both- the quantity would have more than made up for it).
I guess we'll have to wait until fall of 2013 for the $299 iPad mini, when they can drop the price of the iPod Touch to where it should have been originally ($199 or $229).
Is the Touch overly expensive? This is what you seem to be implying. I look at it this way, the Touch is probably more powerful than at least half of the PCs I've ever owned. Most of those PCs cost me far more dollars than one Touch. I can remember paying far more for hard drives with a fraction of the storage. It still comes down to this, where are competitive products, if any exist, priced at.
Mind you I'm not thrilled with Touch pricing but I just don't see a lot of hardware out there that is significantly cheaper.
I'm not surprised by the Home Button difference. I am certain the average phone will get used a lot more than the average PMP. I think I did more than a million presses on that Home Button on my iPhone 4. Even though it was getting a little annoying I can't fault it for functioning after so much abuse.
Yeah, I don't agree with this. On what do you base your assumption that the average phone will get a lot more use? Because its a phone? Kids are texting, and playing games, probably far more than a phone user. While there are a number of adults who have touches, that is not the primary market. So at a minimum, I expect it all averages out.
Either way, that's no excuse to skimp on the home button. Are you kidding me!? On the scale Apple buys parts, there's no excuse for not putting the same high quality home button in every device.
I am actually insulted by this as I have an iPhone 4 with a sticky home button, which at times renders my phone mostly unusable. A simple Google search pulls up thousands of pages devoted to this particular problem with a dozen solutions for fixing it without incurring $150 to have it repaired. Apple had a no questions asked policy to swap out iPhones with faulty home buttons. Essentially a poor design for the amount of use was cited, compounded by changes in iOS to incorporate double-clicks and tripple-clicks -- something Apple remedied in the iPhone 4S. Bottom line, when something is an essential feature of the device, for which you can't otherwise reliably use it, you make sure it is reliable and works every time. You don't design a Porsche and put a cheap starter on it.
So I got chastised for calling this overpriced when it was announced (mainly because it had "retina display" that we now find out is cheaper quality). Can we call it overpriced now?
This should have been $229 (and maybe even just 16gb to justify price)
The Mini should have been $299
And Apple would have sold tons more of both (and although smaller margins on both- the quantity would have more than made up for it).
I guess we'll have to wait until fall of 2013 for the $299 iPad mini, when they can drop the price of the iPod Touch to where it should have been originally ($199 or $229).
It's no more pricier than its predecessor. And while it's of a cheaper quality than the iPhone 5, it's more expensive than the iPod Touch it replaces - Not to mention lighter, faster, better quality, and more capable.
If we where talking about the old days of iPhone OS that might be an issue. At this time though iOS is improved considerably and continues to improve to allow developers to more easily support alternative device sizes.
It's another set of logistical concerns that does need to be addressed. I think there is considerable value in keeping the number of supported resolutions down, for Apple and for third party developers. If it needs to behave like a third (or fourth) category of iOS devices, then that's a potential problem.
The issue with third party developers is overstated. Software developer have had to address these issues for some time when dealing with Mac and PC hardware. Even text based interfaces have to deal with varying terminal sizes. In the end it is all about the right device to ship a product on. There are many iPad only apps for example because developers either don't want to support the small devices or the app isn't suitable for a small screen. Developers are pretty much free to support the devices they want as they see a need.
This is all well and good, nobody wants troublesome hardware. However there is nothing to indicate that the new home button will have the issues of the old. You simply can't imply reliability based on feel.
Yeah, I don't agree with this. On what do you base your assumption that the average phone will get a lot more use? Because its a phone? Kids are texting, and playing games, probably far more than a phone user. While there are a number of adults who have touches, that is not the primary market. So at a minimum, I expect it all averages out.
Either way, that's no excuse to skimp on the home button. Are you kidding me!? On the scale Apple buys parts, there's no excuse for not putting the same high quality home button in every device.
I am actually insulted by this as I have an iPhone 4 with a sticky home button, which at times renders my phone mostly unusable. A simple Google search pulls up thousands of pages devoted to this particular problem with a dozen solutions for fixing it without incurring $150 to have it repaired. Apple had a no questions asked policy to swap out iPhones with faulty home buttons. Essentially a poor design for the amount of use was cited, compounded by changes in iOS to incorporate double-clicks and tripple-clicks -- something Apple remedied in the iPhone 4S. Bottom line, when something is an essential feature of the device, for which you can't otherwise reliably use it, you make sure it is reliable and works every time. You don't design a Porsche and put a cheap starter on it.
... "We've seen this type of design in previous Apple products," the solution provider noted. "The shift to a single ribbon cable is more cost-effective for the manufacturer, but unfortunately it has a negative impact on repairability." ...
This right here shows how the folks at iFixit really just don't get it.
The reason it's a single cable is that it makes it cheaper and easier to manufacture, but iFixit would suggest that this be replaced by a multitude of different smaller cables so the teeny teeny tiny percentage of freaks like them who want to "repair" their iPod touches can do it themselves.
They are as far disconnected from reality as the average Linux user IMO.
You don't create a device that's "bad" for the majority, so some tiny minority can enjoy an aspect of it that no one else does. That's bad design, not good design.
I think it's irresponsible and a disservice. It gives the impression that Apple skimped on this model compared to previous generations.
I agree. I think the basic problem is that Apple products are all good, and people like to hear bad things for the most part.
If the reviewers were honest, every review would be glowing and that's (supposedly) "boring" so they always try to generate some friction and controversy. AppleInsider used to steer away from this sort of thing and they still do with their internal reviews for the most part. They have recently fallen into the same habit as most tech review sites however, and re-post stuff from outside sources that is all uniformly negative.
A tech blog today (seemingly) *has* to have every story that comes out, so instead of ignoring the junk, they drive page views by endlessly repeating everything found on every other site even if it's just a link to the original. With all the tech blogs doing the same thing, the original content drops precipitously, and everyone just repeats the same false gripes over and over again.
It also leads to a situation where a completely incorrect story will flash around the planet and be on every blog before it's discovered that it's actually completely wrong. Then the correction goes out, but that isn't as exciting so most people don't read or see it.
In the end it comes down to the fervent anti-intellectualism rampant in today's global society. Ignorance is king, and the trend seems to be accelerating instead of slowing down.
On the bright side, everyone is so incredibly dumb now, that this is the moment to write that non-fiction book you've always wanted to because the competition amongst true intellects hasn't been this weak since ... well, ever. :-)
This right here shows how the folks at iFixit really just don't get it.
The reason it's a single cable is that it makes it cheaper and easier to manufacture, but iFixit would suggest that this be replaced by a multitude of different smaller cables so the teeny teeny tiny percentage of freaks like them who want to "repair" their iPod touches can do it themselves.
They are as far disconnected from reality as the average Linux user IMO.
You don't create a device that's "bad" for the majority, so some tiny minority can enjoy an aspect of it that no one else does. That's bad design, not good design.
I think they're trying too hard to negatively spin it, and that they're flat wrong on their point too. Fewer cables means there's less to go wrong when you do try to fix it. The octopus of cables with tiny connectors in the iPhone 4 illustrates this well, it would have been easier, not harder, to deal with if it were possible to connect fewer cables and fewer screws on a more unified subassembly with a wider connector, to the main board. The only down side in my opinion is the subassembly would be more expensive.
It's no more pricier than its predecessor. And while it's of a cheaper quality than the iPhone 5, it's more expensive than the iPod Touch it replaces - Not to mention lighter, faster, better quality, and more capable.
This is garbage. Anyone that would pay full price for an iPod Touch now days is just clueless. My iPod Touch 4 is so laggy I can't stand it anymore. It was fine when I first bought it but as apps advanced and became more cpu/gpu intensive the device really began to show it's limitations. Didn't take long. I used to be under the impression that an iPod Touch was simply an iPhone without the phone. I couldn't be more wrong, as it's obvious that the iPod Touch hardware is gimped in comparison.
You can get an iPhone on contract for cheaper or the same price, with MUCH better hardware. I paid 400 dollars for a 64gb Touch and I sincerely hope they don't still charge this much for the device because that is way over priced for gimped hardware. The same thing will happen to the Touch 5 as the 4. The GPU is already only barely ideal for newer games and will fall behind before the end of the year. Anyone who says there is enough RAM because of no phone overhead is clueless too. Just own a Touch and find out, like I do. I can't even scroll through web pages without it lagging horribly. My Nexus One from Jan 2010 destroys my iPod touch 4 in responsiveness and with the amount of lag on every task except for 3D games, which I don't bother with on my N1.
Take a 100 dollars off every model of Touch and I'd say hey, not bad for the price. Sad thing is this is supposed to be the gaming device but the iPhone handles any 3D game MUCH better. Gimped hardware should come along with a gimped price, but that isn't the case with the iPod Touch. Just get rid of it Apple and replace it with the Mini. Problem solved. Can't freakin wait to get rid of this thing and get an iPhone.
Comments
So I got chastised for calling this overpriced when it was announced (mainly because it had "retina display" that we now find out is cheaper quality). Can we call it overpriced now?
This should have been $229 (and maybe even just 16gb to justify price)
The Mini should have been $299
And Apple would have sold tons more of both (and although smaller margins on both- the quantity would have more than made up for it).
I guess we'll have to wait until fall of 2013 for the $299 iPad mini, when they can drop the price of the iPod Touch to where it should have been originally ($199 or $229).
As to what Steve said, people really need to get over the fact that he was a salesman first and foremost. A good salesman sells what he has at the moment.
You're twisting his intent. Don't make him look like the enemy because you disagree with him.
Old Touches had TN displays, the new ones are IPS. That's a considerable improvement right there. I think it's 80-85% of the latest iPhone for 50% of the real price, the phone service subsidy significantly distorts the apparent price of phones.
As for the UI developers can tailor their apps anyway they want to support the screen. Beyond that iOS has been significant improved to make some of the UI elements mailable, many apps will run just fine on the new Mini. For developers actively involved in iOS development it should be rather obvious to them where Apple is going as such their apps should be designed from the ground up to require a minimal of tweaking on a new screen.
Honestly this obsession with the screen size of the Mini and the supposed problems is garbage. It is a different device for a different need. People that dismiss the idea of the Min based on size mis the fact that many people are buying smaller devices because they are in fact smaller.
It's another set of logistical concerns that does need to be addressed. I think there is considerable value in keeping the number of supported resolutions down, for Apple and for third party developers. If it needs to behave like a third (or fourth) category of iOS devices, then that's a potential problem.
Is the Touch overly expensive? This is what you seem to be implying. I look at it this way, the Touch is probably more powerful than at least half of the PCs I've ever owned. Most of those PCs cost me far more dollars than one Touch. I can remember paying far more for hard drives with a fraction of the storage. It still comes down to this, where are competitive products, if any exist, priced at.
Mind you I'm not thrilled with Touch pricing but I just don't see a lot of hardware out there that is significantly cheaper.
Either way, that's no excuse to skimp on the home button. Are you kidding me!? On the scale Apple buys parts, there's no excuse for not putting the same high quality home button in every device.
I am actually insulted by this as I have an iPhone 4 with a sticky home button, which at times renders my phone mostly unusable. A simple Google search pulls up thousands of pages devoted to this particular problem with a dozen solutions for fixing it without incurring $150 to have it repaired. Apple had a no questions asked policy to swap out iPhones with faulty home buttons. Essentially a poor design for the amount of use was cited, compounded by changes in iOS to incorporate double-clicks and tripple-clicks -- something Apple remedied in the iPhone 4S. Bottom line, when something is an essential feature of the device, for which you can't otherwise reliably use it, you make sure it is reliable and works every time. You don't design a Porsche and put a cheap starter on it.
The issue with third party developers is overstated. Software developer have had to address these issues for some time when dealing with Mac and PC hardware. Even text based interfaces have to deal with varying terminal sizes. In the end it is all about the right device to ship a product on. There are many iPad only apps for example because developers either don't want to support the small devices or the app isn't suitable for a small screen. Developers are pretty much free to support the devices they want as they see a need.
Originally Posted by Postulant
I think it's irresponsible and a disservice. It gives the impression that Apple skimped on this model compared to previous generations.
But only Apple can sue them for slander, which is a shame.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
... "We've seen this type of design in previous Apple products," the solution provider noted. "The shift to a single ribbon cable is more cost-effective for the manufacturer, but unfortunately it has a negative impact on repairability." ...
This right here shows how the folks at iFixit really just don't get it.
The reason it's a single cable is that it makes it cheaper and easier to manufacture, but iFixit would suggest that this be replaced by a multitude of different smaller cables so the teeny teeny tiny percentage of freaks like them who want to "repair" their iPod touches can do it themselves.
They are as far disconnected from reality as the average Linux user IMO.
You don't create a device that's "bad" for the majority, so some tiny minority can enjoy an aspect of it that no one else does. That's bad design, not good design.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant
I think it's irresponsible and a disservice. It gives the impression that Apple skimped on this model compared to previous generations.
I agree. I think the basic problem is that Apple products are all good, and people like to hear bad things for the most part.
If the reviewers were honest, every review would be glowing and that's (supposedly) "boring" so they always try to generate some friction and controversy. AppleInsider used to steer away from this sort of thing and they still do with their internal reviews for the most part. They have recently fallen into the same habit as most tech review sites however, and re-post stuff from outside sources that is all uniformly negative.
A tech blog today (seemingly) *has* to have every story that comes out, so instead of ignoring the junk, they drive page views by endlessly repeating everything found on every other site even if it's just a link to the original. With all the tech blogs doing the same thing, the original content drops precipitously, and everyone just repeats the same false gripes over and over again.
It also leads to a situation where a completely incorrect story will flash around the planet and be on every blog before it's discovered that it's actually completely wrong. Then the correction goes out, but that isn't as exciting so most people don't read or see it.
In the end it comes down to the fervent anti-intellectualism rampant in today's global society. Ignorance is king, and the trend seems to be accelerating instead of slowing down.
On the bright side, everyone is so incredibly dumb now, that this is the moment to write that non-fiction book you've always wanted to because the competition amongst true intellects hasn't been this weak since ... well, ever. :-)
I think they're trying too hard to negatively spin it, and that they're flat wrong on their point too. Fewer cables means there's less to go wrong when you do try to fix it. The octopus of cables with tiny connectors in the iPhone 4 illustrates this well, it would have been easier, not harder, to deal with if it were possible to connect fewer cables and fewer screws on a more unified subassembly with a wider connector, to the main board. The only down side in my opinion is the subassembly would be more expensive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant
It's no more pricier than its predecessor. And while it's of a cheaper quality than the iPhone 5, it's more expensive than the iPod Touch it replaces - Not to mention lighter, faster, better quality, and more capable.
Ah, logic.....
You can get an iPhone on contract for cheaper or the same price, with MUCH better hardware. I paid 400 dollars for a 64gb Touch and I sincerely hope they don't still charge this much for the device because that is way over priced for gimped hardware. The same thing will happen to the Touch 5 as the 4. The GPU is already only barely ideal for newer games and will fall behind before the end of the year. Anyone who says there is enough RAM because of no phone overhead is clueless too. Just own a Touch and find out, like I do. I can't even scroll through web pages without it lagging horribly. My Nexus One from Jan 2010 destroys my iPod touch 4 in responsiveness and with the amount of lag on every task except for 3D games, which I don't bother with on my N1.
Take a 100 dollars off every model of Touch and I'd say hey, not bad for the price. Sad thing is this is supposed to be the gaming device but the iPhone handles any 3D game MUCH better. Gimped hardware should come along with a gimped price, but that isn't the case with the iPod Touch. Just get rid of it Apple and replace it with the Mini. Problem solved. Can't freakin wait to get rid of this thing and get an iPhone.