Apple unveils new 16GB iPod touch model without iSight, priced at $229

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 66
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    The article says no iSight camera but I've always considered that the name of the front-facing camera until FaceTime camera became the norm. Did the rear-facing camera start being called iSight camera?

    edit: I see that Apple does list it as iSight for the back camera on the other iPod Touch models.
  • Reply 22 of 66
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Interesting that they left out the loop. But I guess with no rear camera they didn't think it was necessary?
  • Reply 23 of 66
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    broadbean wrote: »
    No more wrist strap?

    Nice catch. No camera, LED flash, loop strap or the popup connector to attach it.
  • Reply 24 of 66
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,652member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post



    I think Apple is testing out a variant to see how adoption goes, before implementing something similar on the iPhone.



    I think it's a bad idea, overall. Making it a few bucks cheaper won't make it more appealing, considering that a basic camera is a rather core feature in most handheld devices now.



    I call 'fail' on this one.


     


    Best see how it sells. Apple knows how well it's $199 model sells, though it is a year old, this is a test of market elasticity for lower end iPods. How many more can you sell at $229. Probably lots more. Plenty of people don't want a camera in a phone, or a device. They have cameras.


     


    Do music players need cameras? 

  • Reply 25 of 66
    pokepoke Posts: 506member


    Apple obviously wanted to eliminate the 3.5" iPod touch and removing the camera was the only way to meet their price point. I think this means we're going to see the rumoured low-cost iPhone. The upcoming iPhone line-up would be the 4S, 5 and 5S. Only the 4S would have a 3.5" display. If Apple is instead going to introduce a low-cost version of the 5 then it won't want a 3.5" display in its iPod touch line-up either. Note that the old 3.5" iPod touch didn't have a Lightning connector either and Apple probably wants to move to a range of products all with the same connector, which means eliminating the 4S next update too. Why now? Probably because they're ramping down production on the 4 and 4S ahead of the update. It's also likely the iPod touch won't be redesigned this year.

  • Reply 26 of 66
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by CogitoDexter View Post


    Seems a bit perplexing to me. The costs involved in the variation of the manufacturing process must be quite high for what seems to me a rather niche product offering less than something better at only a small amount more. Are people who buy iPod Touches *that* price conscious? It seems to me to be diluting the iPod Touch range a little bit and for a product line that doesn't have a great impact on Apple's bottom line, I wonder why they've done it...



     


    It also means that no one can ever drag out the "Apple wouldn't do this" or "This is un-Apple" trope ever again.  Which is sad because I rely on that one myself.  image


     


    This move is so completely opposite to everything Apple usually does and the way it usually behaves that it negates all of that.  

  • Reply 27 of 66
    suddenly newtonsuddenly newton Posts: 13,776member
    macvicta wrote: »
    Are the iPads due to receive the same treatment next?

    And they can leave out the FaceTime cameras too if it'll make them even cheaper, I never use them.

    They did. It was called iPad, the original iPad.
  • Reply 28 of 66
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    This is one of the stupidest updates they've done in a good long while. Will anyone even buy this? 





    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

    Really, what's with that negativity?


     


    Check him; he's probably a troll account.





    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

    They did. It was called iPad, the original iPad.


     


    Oh, I don't think that can be said.

  • Reply 29 of 66
    allenbfallenbf Posts: 993member
    This analyst has excellent connections, he's pretty much the only one I pay attention to on predictions. Scarily accurate, proved once again.

    Re: iPod touch, I don't get it. My kids have one each and they use the camera all the time. I could see removing the camera from an iPad but not the Touch. Strange.
  • Reply 30 of 66
    satchmosatchmo Posts: 2,699member


    I'm surprised they didn't remove the front facing camera instead. 


    Do most owners use their Touch for a camera or for FaceTime? I would think a camera would be used more on a regular basis.


     


    But at least the price is going down. Frankly, I also wonder if it has to do with slowing sales.


    I always thought, $299 is a pretty steep price albeit it has 32gb.

  • Reply 31 of 66
    The purpose of this model is not to sell huge quantities.
    The purpose is to have a low enough price that people consider buying it and when they comparison shop they decide to get the more expensive one.
  • Reply 32 of 66
    isteelersisteelers Posts: 738member
    Agreed. I couldn't live without my classic.

    I'm with ya. It's nice to be able to take all of your music with you instead of having to change out songs. The capacity can't be beat.
  • Reply 33 of 66
    zarenzaren Posts: 49member


    I bought my daughter an iPod Touch mostly due to the fact that it had the camera. She got it for Christmas, and probably has close to a thousand pictures on it already, plus she's big into SnapChat with her friends. I can't see the value in removing the good camera on a Touch, but apparently someone else does.

  • Reply 34 of 66
    rayzrayz Posts: 814member
    Makes no sense to me, unless Apple is about to unveil its own wireless comm network.
  • Reply 35 of 66
    arbiter8arbiter8 Posts: 35member


    Hmm, for just $20 more you can get a 32GB with the camera and flash and loop from the refurbished store.

  • Reply 36 of 66
    arbiter8arbiter8 Posts: 35member

    Quote:


    Originally Posted by satchmo


     


    I'm surprised they didn't remove the front facing camera instead. 


    Do most owners use their Touch for a camera or for FaceTime? I would think a camera would be used more on a regular basis.




     


     


     


    I was thinking the same thing.  I use the camera a ton, but I've only used facetime a few times.

  • Reply 37 of 66
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Arbiter8 View Post


    I was thinking the same thing.  I use the camera a ton, but I've only used facetime a few times.



    Perhaps Apple is aware of some new trend among teens based on their analysis of usage statistics that average adult consumers have no clue about. Is it possible that FaceTime turned out to be more popular with teens than with spouses as Apple originally imagined?


     


    It is a little awkward, but not impossible, to take pictures with the front facing camera but you definitely need the front facing camera for FaceTime. Teens are often just posting pictures of themselves for social media and the front facing camera works pretty well for that.

  • Reply 38 of 66
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,814member
    asdasd wrote: »
    Interesting that Apple can do this on iPods but not iPhones. Obviously they need a cheaper iPhone first, but they can differentiate with removing cameras on that as they wish.

    Apple doesn't need a new cheap iPhone. I also don't think they will remove the camera either as the iPhone is also the most popular camera too.
  • Reply 39 of 66
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,464member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by zaren View Post


    I bought my daughter an iPod Touch mostly due to the fact that it had the camera. She got it for Christmas, and probably has close to a thousand pictures on it already, plus she's big into SnapChat with her friends. I can't see the value in removing the good camera on a Touch, but apparently someone else does.



     


    In my opinion it was a terrible move. Apple clearly can meet the lower price point including the camera. LG makes an entire Nexus phone with profits for $300. Apple could surely find a way to make an iPod for $230-250 and still include the camera.


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post




    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Arbiter8 View Post


    I was thinking the same thing.  I use the camera a ton, but I've only used facetime a few times.



    Perhaps Apple is aware of some new trend among teens based on their analysis of usage statistics that average adult consumers have no clue about. Is it possible that FaceTime turned out to be more popular with teens than with spouses as Apple originally imagined?


     


    It is a little awkward, but not impossible, to take pictures with the front facing camera but you definitely need the front facing camera for FaceTime. Teens are often just posting pictures of themselves for social media and the front facing camera works pretty well for that.



     


    My sons never use Facetime however they do Skype with everyone while using their computers and playing Minecraft. They tend to use Skype more on their iPod Touch as well.

  • Reply 40 of 66
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by trumptman View Post




    My sons never use Facetime however they do Skype with everyone while using their computers and playing Minecraft. They tend to use Skype more on their iPod Touch as well.



    Skype, FaceTime, both use the same camera. I prefer Skype because it is so cross platform and also because I'm always communicating internationally where iDevices are less common and Skype is ubiquitous. I'm just wondering if teens are placing video calls more than adults, using any of the available apps. It is sometimes difficult for a parent to know exactly what kind of activity a teen is doing when not under their supervision. If there are no parental controls in place for FaceTime then they may be using it more than you know.

Sign In or Register to comment.