Apple launches $199 16GB iPod touch with rear camera in 6 colors, slashes prices on 32GB & 64GB mode

12346»

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 116
    Marvin wrote: »
    I wonder what makes the price difference so large between the iPhone and iPod.

    Why is a 16GB iPod Touch with A5 $199 but a 16GB iPhone 5C with A6 $549? The iPod is metal, the 5C is plastic so it can't be the material cost.

    The difference are A5 -> A6; 5MP camera -> 8MP camera; cellular antenna. That adds $350 to the price.

    The iPhone is subject to license fees in regards to its cellular voice and data capability.

    That is built into the price of the iPhone. It's not just the raw cost of the parts.
  • Reply 102 of 116
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    The iPhone is subject to license fees in regards to its cellular voice and data capability.

    That is built into the price of the iPhone. It's not just the raw cost of the parts.

    And they clearly get a reduced economies of scale (even though there are many cost savings with using mostly iPhone components which is why it can exist at that price at all) as well as a lower profit margin over the iPhone as noted by considerably lower demand. There could also be quality differences that would make the iPhone go through more stringent testing of the HW, like casing, color accuracy of the display, performance per Watt variances.
  • Reply 103 of 116
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,001member
    The iPhone is subject to license fees in regards to its cellular voice and data capability.

    That is built into the price of the iPhone. It's not just the raw cost of the parts.

    I highly doubt that it's $350 worth of fees. I agree with [@]SolipsismX[/@] in that there are other factors involved.
  • Reply 104 of 116
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    I highly doubt that it's $350 worth of fees. I agree with [@]SolipsismX[/@] in that there are other factors involved.

    Sure.

    The question was asked why an iPhone costs so more that an iPod Touch.

    The iPhone uses better parts... and it has additional fees that iPods don't have.

    You're right... many factors affect the price of the iPhone vs the iPod Touch.

    But a big one is the fact that the iPhone is a cell phone.
  • Reply 105 of 116
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,671member
    Marvin wrote: »
    The difference are A5 -> A6; 5MP camera -> 8MP camera; cellular antenna. That adds $350 to the price.

    Plus the GPS thingy in the Qualcomm WTR1605L:
    https://chipworks.secure.force.com/catalog/ProductDetails?sku=QUA-WTR1605L&viewState=DetailView&cartID=&g=

    I think the lenses are different as well: five-element lens with a hybrid IR filter and an ƒ/2.4 vs ??? (can't find a solid answer) and half the NAND on the music player. Aslo different audio codecs (338S1116 vs 338S1146) et cetera

    Does the iPod touch have a vibrator motor? And the 5c may be 'plastic', it does have a steel frame.
  • Reply 106 of 116
    noivadnoivad Posts: 186member
    I realize many people are not in my shoes, but the dwindling options tells me the industry gave up improving things years ago. Now it is a price wars. I am still waiting for Apple to break 128GB on their iPads & iPhones 64GB limit, much less the iPod touches. I bought a 160GB iPod in 2009 & am waiting for them to come out with a portable with more storage so I can load all my music without having to pick & chose and rotate or down-sample everything to sound muddy on decent audio systems. Seriously, if they want us to have one device for all our stuff in each form factor, they need to step up an offer those of us that have a lot of music, using high quality lossless audio at least 256GB models. Considering how much the storage densities of flash devices has increased over the past 5 years, they could easily offer it at a premium. 16GB is a joke for anyone that uses their device very much or has a lot of content/apps. A lot of people suggest streaming, but streaming is low quality and also runs up your data bill (unless you stream through t-mobile on an approved service that doesn't count against your data plan).

    Storage increases stalled out a few years ago in all form factors, and it is not because they can%u2019t do it. There are filed engineers carrying around 2 & 3 TB portable flash devices about the size of an iPod classic. It is just because the carriers and companies make more on streaming and lower cost memory to slap into their anemic device. It is pitiful that 2.5" 1.5TB drives are harder to find now than a year ago. I am glad I got 2 of them in my laptop, but now with apple dropping standard HDs bays, I will be stuck with this until storage catches up to my needs. I doubt that will happen very soon with the stupid emphasis on streaming everything, and compressing audio and video to sub-analog quality. It is really saddening to see everyone settle for this because it makes those of us at the edge outgrow the industry. Maybe in 5 years more people will be where I am now, and things will improve, but Moore%u2019s law has stalled out in terms of portable storage for now.
  • Reply 107 of 116
    sdbryansdbryan Posts: 348member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jungmark View Post





    So how does this help Apple? It doesn't.

    More products sold to more people seems like the obvious answer. That is how Apple makes most of its profit: selling innovative, high quality hardware to customers. For example Apple sells many wifi only iPads. But cellular data enabled iPads are also sold. For the iPod touch product Apple sells the wifi only model but not the corresponding cellular data enabled version.

     

    The only impediment I see to this option is whether the cellular carrier oligopoly will allow it in the same way the iPad was accommodated. The current iPod touch can be used for VoIP calls and apps that are less hobbled by legacy technology like FaceTime and FaceTime audio-only. I use the Google Voice app as my preferred method of sending and receiving SMS. But there are many other options which are generally free. The carriers are probably not concerned about the few people willing to make calls with an iPad because of its size, but an iPod touch is the same size as an iPhone and much thinner.

  • Reply 108 of 116
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member

    After owning a portable MP3 player with a built in DAC I don't think I could in good conscious get behind another one with out it. The only people who I would think the iPod would be good for are children who don't have a phone yet, which their aren't many but even then I think they would prefer a small tablet like the original iPad Min or Nexus 7, I know my kids do. I think the iPod is defiantly on the way out. Geesh, I think we still have like 5 of them stuffed in drawers throughout the house,  I should donate them.

  • Reply 109 of 116
    sdbryansdbryan Posts: 348member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Relic View Post

     

    After owning a portable MP3 player with a built in DAC I don't think I could in good conscious get behind another one with out it...


    You may well be right if audio is the major consideration and for many (most?) it is. But despite its name the iPod touch is basically the same ultra portable computer as the iPhone, both of which are made vastly more powerful with an internet connection. That is why my wish list for the iPod touch includes a cellular data radio option like the iPad.

  • Reply 110 of 116
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mvigod View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

     

     

    I would love to see a pricing spread like that for storage capacities on the iPhone. The way it is right now is absolutely ridiculous -- $100 to go from 16GB to 32GB? What is this, 2009?


     

    10000% agree. It is one of the reasons I would consider a Galaxy S5 even.  The knowledge of how bad apple is raping us for extra memory and also not providing support for SD card.  I don't mind paying a small premium for Apple in general.  I also don't mind paying even a little above fair market for extra memory.  I don't have the stomach for getting raped on memory knowing what it costs them (or me)


     

    If you object to Apple 'raping' you, you're free to not buy Apple. No need to be a martyr.

  • Reply 111 of 116
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sdbryan View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

     

    ...

    How can so many people be [pick an insult] enough to want a SMALLER iPad?! Smaller tablets and bigger phones? How [same insult] can people be?! 


     

    OK, strike my use of the letter A rather than the letter O. The reason I want an iPod touch with cellular data is that I sometimes have my iPad with me but I always have my iPod touch. They are both iOS devices but the iPod runs apps just like the iPhone, not a scaled down iPad app. Where there is wifi, all is well. If not, it would be very nice to have cellular data connectivity without the extra bulk of an iPhone (and legacy services with their associated costs).

     

    Extending the month to month data for the iPod would be great because when I am in a location with ample wifi there is no monthly bill (think of it, an "iPhone" with no monthly bill!). Right now Apple has the benefit of the irrationality of fashion. Young children insist that they simply must have an iPhone and parents cave in. What happens when fashion changes? It would be very useful to have an "always connected" iOS device with no mandatory monthly bill to compete with what the cool kids insist is the only must have device.

     

    So just to be clear, I already have my "smaller iPad" and it has more apps designed for it than any iPad (i.e. it runs all iOS apps that are specifically designed for the iPhone form factor). I just want to have the cellular data radio (which would undoubtedly be an option that adds ~$100) so internet connectivity would be improved when one wanders in the wilderness.

     

    p.s. I recently was visiting relatives in Mexico, MO. I had cellular data turned on for my iPad and it did allow me to 'connect' to Verizon but it was neither LTE nor 3G. It was some connection that did not allow for connection to the internet. Bummer.


     

    Just roll out your own mobile network and create your own iPod equivalent with cellular access and you'll get what you desire. Shouldn’t be hard.

  • Reply 112 of 116
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,001member
    Just roll out your own mobile network and create your own iPod equivalent with cellular access and you'll get what you desire. Shouldn’t be hard.

    Or carry around 2 tin cans and a string.
  • Reply 113 of 116
    adamwadamw Posts: 114guest

    I wonder how long Apple will continue to offer the iPod Touch and keep refreshing it? This seems like a modest refresh. It looks like they are putting almost all their effort into the iPhone and the rumored iWatch in the mobile space, and not really doing much with the iPod Touch.

  • Reply 114 of 116
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    adamw wrote: »
    I wonder how long Apple will continue to offer the iPod Touch and keep refreshing it? This seems like a modest refresh. It looks like they are putting almost all their effort into the iPhone and the rumored iWatch in the mobile space, and not really doing much with the iPod Touch.

    From what I can tell the lower-end model that was using nearly 4(?) year old tech got a bump to the 2 year old tech that is in the higher-end options of the iPod Touch line. I think that's likely setting the stage for the lower-end model to stay where it is, 2 years behind, with the new iPhone design then having some new iPod Touch designs. Especially if we are to believe there will be a 4.7" and/or a 5.5" iPhone, which I think will help with iPod Touch sales.

    A couple logistical items to consider.

    1. The iPod Classic, which hasn't been updated in HW since 2009, doesn't need to be since it's not tied to the App Store ecosystem. If they can sell, say, even 10k per year with that old design it is probably worth keeping it going for 5 years with no change.
    2. The iPod Touch has many of the same components as the iPhone so the R&D is mostly paid for already. How many do they really need to sell with biennial casing and HW update to make it viable? It won't ever bring in iPhone and iPad numbers and profit but it doesn't need to be worth having on the books.
    3. The iPod Nano and iPod Shuffle appear to sell less than the iPod Touch (I seem to read that the iPod Touch is about half of all iPod sales) but these can be simple and inexpensive gifts that also probably make worthwhile to keep around.
    4. I think it's likely once they stop investing in an iPod line's HW changes we'll see them around for a long time like the iPod Classic. Perhaps first it will be just an anodizing change like with last year's iPoids and eventually no change, save for the iPod Touch which really needs to be updated every couple years or be pulled off completely because of the need to run the latest version of iOS. For example, they can't just stop with the iPod Shuffle that will run iOS 8 as the last version it runs and then 4 years from now on iOS 12 have it still on the store.
  • Reply 115 of 116
    andysol wrote: »
    There you go again.

    "Apple will never increase the price of the iPad mini or make it the same specs as the full sized iPad"

    Figured you'd learn your lesson by now.

    We'll most likely see an updated model launched alongside the iPads this October- and if it happens I'll be buying one day one for my 5 yr old (who had the current touch). See how I don't make definitive claims so that I don't look like a complete idiot if they happen?

    AFAIK, the iPad Air and Mini with Retina Display have the same specs, just a different size screen.
  • Reply 116 of 116
    Darn. I don't even need 32GB --well ok so I do, but if I could predict the future and saw this coming I would have waited and got the 16GB model as it now has a camera. OR I could have got the new cheaper 32GB.

    Thanks for wasting my money, Apple.
Sign In or Register to comment.