Make it thicker- very simple. So do we all really want this mediocre gaming device that SJ is trying to spin on us? The PSP runs rings around it. I mean- it's OK but seriously?
Just out of curiosity, why do you need a decent camera to use a gaming device?
... Who said, ?You can make some of the people happy all of the time, you call can make all of the people happy some of the time, but you can?t make all of the people happy all of the time??
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time."
?? The Touch should get a better camera than iPhone not crap like the toy Nano. Why is Apple downgrading the Touch? Calling it a gaming device, etc. The Touch's camera should get both zoom and flash since it doesn't need battery power for phone calls. It should be a total camera replacement. I would even forgo video in favor of a real decent camera.
How is the Touch going to get a better camera than the iPhone? The iPhone's camera won't even fit inside the iPod Touch. If they're going to include a camera as nice as the IPhone's they're going to have to make it thicker, and that's obviously not going to happen. If anything they'll want to make the iPhone thinner as well in the future when they can fit a reasonably priced high-quality camera inside it. I doubt the Touch will be getting much thicker, if at all, in the future.
How is the Touch going to get a better camera than the iPhone? The iPhone's camera won't even fit inside the iPod Touch. If they're going to include a camera as nice as the IPhone's they're going to have to make it thicker, and that's obviously not going to happen. If anything they'll want to make the iPhone thinner as well in the future when they can fit a reasonably priced high-quality camera inside it. I doubt the Touch will be getting much thicker, if at all, in the future.
That is his point. Apple shouldn't care about selling aestethically attractive and lightweight devices if it means not having a camera that isn't the best out there. I am guessing this at he wants to see.
Have you seen the nano's video? Don't judge it just from the numbers.
FB doesn't display images at any higher resolution than VGA, there's a quick diminishing return on throwing MPs at the problem, you can upload any size you want, but it gets scaled down to roughly VGA anyways.
Maybe the people I know are an oddity, but a lot of people upload using their mobile upload service, and those aren't very good at all.
Yeah I think it's your sample. I've seen thousands of pictures and none of them look like they were taken with a VGA camera (big difference between that and a quality picture scaled down to VGA).
Bottom line is that the only reason why Apple didn't include a camera is because they don't want the iPod Touch to become more attractive to the average consumer then their iPhone... Apple has almost bet its future with the iPhone.
Bottom line is that the only reason why Apple didn't include a camera is because they don't want the iPod Touch to become more attractive to the average consumer then their iPhone... Apple has almost bet its future with the iPhone.
So why are there convincing images of a Touch with a camera several months old that match up identically with 3G Touch with a space for a camera? Are you saying that Apple realized after all that R&D was put into it that they shouldn’t add it to the Touch? Do you really think that a weak video camera that can’t do still images is going to hurt iPhone sales, a WiFi chip that will likely be able to do 802.11n in the future, a CPU that is newer and potentially faster, as well as 64GB Flash while the iPhone only has 32GB a smart move if it’s all about the iPhone? Last year, the Touch had headphone controls that I wished I had and the CPU was clocked higher than the iPhone 3G. That doesn’t sound Apple knows what they are doing if it’s all about making the iPhone better in every category.
I don?t think it makes sense for the 8GB Touch to be the same price as the 8GB Nano. That makes no sense from a marketing standpoint. I have no doubt that Apple makes a higher percentage on the 8GB Touch than it does on the 16GB Touch, but that doesn?t mean it makes more money per unit.
As for up-selling, I don?t see how that is a problem. That is a very old business practice that has served many businesses well. Why Apple shouldn?t be allowed to execute this seems silly.
I do think that you might be right about the mid-release bump and upgrade. Though it will depends on current supply and demand.
Bottom line, I'll be waiting for the 16Gb bump with the new innards. Apple did this type of release with the iPhone too - selling the old tech for $99 alongside the 3Gs. Maybe people will jump for that cheap last-year's tech iPhone and iPod Touch but I won't.
Are you saying that Apple realized after all that R&D was put into it that they shouldn?t add it to the Touch?
Yes I am. Will they eventually put one in? Yes they will. But Apple will hold if off until the next major revision of the iPod Touch to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Do you really think that a weak video camera that can?t do still images is going to hurt iPhone sales, a WiFi chip that will likely be able to do 802.11n in the future, a CPU that is newer and potentially faster, as well as 64GB Flash while the iPhone only has 32GB a smart move if it?s all about the iPhone?
There is a reason why the iPod Touch technologically isn't an iPhone minus the phone. Apple wants (on purpose) to separate the iPhone and iPod Touch products.
Yes I am. Will they eventually put one in? Yes they will. But Apple will hold if off until the next major revision of the iPod Touch to do so.
With the Nano getting a video camera, the Touch having the exact space for the Nano?s video camera, and proof that at least one model with said video was made, the most likely scenario is that the rumours were likely true. All this conspiracy crap that ignores the fact that the Touch can never be an iPhone and that the Touch has many features and options that already beat the iPhone is bullocks.
Quote:
There is a reason why the iPod Touch technologically isn't an iPhone minus the phone. Apple wants (on purpose) to separate the iPhone and iPod Touch products.
Really? Apple wants one to be a phone and the other not to be a phone? How about that!
I think the technical reason is BS. Clearly, the camera works in the Nano, so why wouldn't it work in the Touch? I think the real reason is Apple changed it's mind about offering the cheap camera that is in the Nano in the Touch. It will wait until it can fit the iPhone camera in the Touch. I think that is the right thing to do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
I think it is clear from the pics now that a camera was destined for the iPod Touch but is not there for what ever reason. It is very likely that the reported technical reasons are accurate, as I can't see Apple getting this far and then having a plastic spacer produced so they can scrap the camera idea.
While the camera may have the same dimensions as the Nano, one should not assume that it was exactly the same device. It could have had other features they wanted to explore such as higher res video, high res still pics, or auto focus for that matter. Any of these could have been tripping points for the camera. Frankly we don't even know at this moment if the hardware in the Nano even has a still pic mode. In other words maybe the camera in Nano could do stills but they are so bad Apple didn't want to consider them and are suing the sensor only as a video device. Maybe video only wasn't in the game for the Touch.
The expanded Flash capacity is going to make many people happy and frankly is likely to be a bigger draw than the camera would have been. However one thing that hasn't been investigated or reported yet is the amount of RAM installed? I'm wondering if the high end devices went to 256MB, info here would be appreciated. The more RAM the more flexible and interesting the apps that can be installed.
Appleinsider reported a few days ago that "sources" say Apple would like to introduce the camera as soon as possible. It seems very likely given the space for the camera in the iPod Touch that Apple was intending to introduce one but had technical problems as rumoured and Steve Jobs' explanation of the Touch needing to be cheap is just a smokescreen and delaying tactic. Certainly, besides the space for a camera, the 3rd gen iPod Touch getting iPhone OS 3.1.1 while everything else gets vanilla iPhone OS 3.1 indicates that some last minute revisions were needed. Perhaps the close proximity of the camera/mic and the WiFi/Bluetooth chip caused interference which could be resolved with shielding or different camera/mic choice? The cost of the Nano's camera is only going to be in the single digit dollar cost (the iPhone 3G S's autofocus camera costs $9.95 according to iSuppli) so it's highly doubtful that adding a camera would make the Touch unprofitable at the $299 and $399 price points. The reduced profit margins would probably be made up by the additional sales having the camera will bring.
I think it's likely that the camera will be introduced in a mid-life January refresh of the 3rd gen iPod Touch. I can't see them doing it before the holidays since it would be disruptive to the supply channel at a critical time. But a post-Christmas introduction is definitely possible and would be similar to what was done to the 17" MacBook Pro which was updated but kept non-Unibody when the rest of the Unibodies were released last October, before being replaced with a 17" Unibody just 3 months later in January 2009. If the iTablet is released early next year as predicted, then it'd make sense to give the iPod Touch a mini-refresh whether in features or pricing, perhaps a silent one, at the same time to better realign the product lineup.
Even if it uses the same camera hardware, I'm hoping to differentiate the iPod Touch's camera from the Nano's, the Touch will get photo capability which can probably be helped with software enhancement using the Touch's better processor. The Touch could probably leverage the motion compensation algorithms developed for iMovie.
I'm guessing that the 3rd gen iPod Touch didn't get a digital compass or the oleophobic screen coating? These would both be sensible additions where the coating goes to the quality perception of Apple products, while the digital compass could use wider adoption as a complementary control method with the accelerometer. Beyond the obvious compass direction applications, I would think more advanced algorithms could use the digital compass data to assist the accelerometer is detecting and refining how the device position is changing leading to more accurate controls in things like games (supposedly the Touch's selling point), which can only be a good thing.
I think the technical reason is BS. Clearly, the camera works in the Nano, so why wouldn't it work in the Touch? I think the real reason is Apple changed it's mind about offering the cheap camera that is in the Nano in the Touch. It will wait until it can fit the iPhone camera in the Touch. I think that is the right thing to do.
How can you make such an absolute statement when the internals and the OS of the two devices are completely different?
I agree with TBell at the part where he/she says: "It will wait until it can fit the iPhone camera in the Touch. I think that is the right thing to do.. I think that the camera in the nano is not up to snuff for the touch." although it won't be the exact same camera due to dimensions.
I think that Apple knows of technology out there that will allow it to put at least as good a camera in the touch that is in the iPhone and perhaps the camera was not quite ready in time for the September release.
I wish apple would make the iPod touch's back out of the same stuff as the first iPhone, cause that didn't get fingerprints and the stainless steel does.
Comments
Make it thicker- very simple. So do we all really want this mediocre gaming device that SJ is trying to spin on us? The PSP runs rings around it. I mean- it's OK but seriously?
Just out of curiosity, why do you need a decent camera to use a gaming device?
... Who said, ?You can make some of the people happy all of the time, you call can make all of the people happy some of the time, but you can?t make all of the people happy all of the time??
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time."
Abraham Lincoln
?? The Touch should get a better camera than iPhone not crap like the toy Nano. Why is Apple downgrading the Touch? Calling it a gaming device, etc. The Touch's camera should get both zoom and flash since it doesn't need battery power for phone calls. It should be a total camera replacement. I would even forgo video in favor of a real decent camera.
How is the Touch going to get a better camera than the iPhone? The iPhone's camera won't even fit inside the iPod Touch. If they're going to include a camera as nice as the IPhone's they're going to have to make it thicker, and that's obviously not going to happen. If anything they'll want to make the iPhone thinner as well in the future when they can fit a reasonably priced high-quality camera inside it. I doubt the Touch will be getting much thicker, if at all, in the future.
How is the Touch going to get a better camera than the iPhone? The iPhone's camera won't even fit inside the iPod Touch. If they're going to include a camera as nice as the IPhone's they're going to have to make it thicker, and that's obviously not going to happen. If anything they'll want to make the iPhone thinner as well in the future when they can fit a reasonably priced high-quality camera inside it. I doubt the Touch will be getting much thicker, if at all, in the future.
That is his point. Apple shouldn't care about selling aestethically attractive and lightweight devices if it means not having a camera that isn't the best out there. I am guessing this at he wants to see.
Have you seen the nano's video? Don't judge it just from the numbers.
FB doesn't display images at any higher resolution than VGA, there's a quick diminishing return on throwing MPs at the problem, you can upload any size you want, but it gets scaled down to roughly VGA anyways.
Maybe the people I know are an oddity, but a lot of people upload using their mobile upload service, and those aren't very good at all.
Yeah I think it's your sample. I've seen thousands of pictures and none of them look like they were taken with a VGA camera (big difference between that and a quality picture scaled down to VGA).
Hmm. I guess that would explain Steve's physical appearance at the event.
Steve can probably *fit* in that space in the iPod touch
YET ANOTHER BAD JOKE
Get well Steve - buy organic cheese and put it on whatever you're eating
Bottom line is that the only reason why Apple didn't include a camera is because they don't want the iPod Touch to become more attractive to the average consumer then their iPhone... Apple has almost bet its future with the iPhone.
So why are there convincing images of a Touch with a camera several months old that match up identically with 3G Touch with a space for a camera? Are you saying that Apple realized after all that R&D was put into it that they shouldn’t add it to the Touch? Do you really think that a weak video camera that can’t do still images is going to hurt iPhone sales, a WiFi chip that will likely be able to do 802.11n in the future, a CPU that is newer and potentially faster, as well as 64GB Flash while the iPhone only has 32GB a smart move if it’s all about the iPhone? Last year, the Touch had headphone controls that I wished I had and the CPU was clocked higher than the iPhone 3G. That doesn’t sound Apple knows what they are doing if it’s all about making the iPhone better in every category.
As sad as it is guys, you'll have to live with what you've been offered. The real reason it got no camera is the iPhone /sobvious
Of course I'll have to live with it. But Apple will have to live without my money too! And the camera should be equal to that of the iPhone.
I don?t think it makes sense for the 8GB Touch to be the same price as the 8GB Nano. That makes no sense from a marketing standpoint. I have no doubt that Apple makes a higher percentage on the 8GB Touch than it does on the 16GB Touch, but that doesn?t mean it makes more money per unit.
As for up-selling, I don?t see how that is a problem. That is a very old business practice that has served many businesses well. Why Apple shouldn?t be allowed to execute this seems silly.
I do think that you might be right about the mid-release bump and upgrade. Though it will depends on current supply and demand.
Bottom line, I'll be waiting for the 16Gb bump with the new innards. Apple did this type of release with the iPhone too - selling the old tech for $99 alongside the 3Gs. Maybe people will jump for that cheap last-year's tech iPhone and iPod Touch but I won't.
Of course I'll have to live with it. But Apple will have to live without my money too! And the camera should be equal to that of the iPhone.
Why is that, because they look similar when you view them from the front or because they both run iPhone OS X.
Are you saying that Apple realized after all that R&D was put into it that they shouldn?t add it to the Touch?
Yes I am. Will they eventually put one in? Yes they will. But Apple will hold if off until the next major revision of the iPod Touch to do so.
Do you really think that a weak video camera that can?t do still images is going to hurt iPhone sales, a WiFi chip that will likely be able to do 802.11n in the future, a CPU that is newer and potentially faster, as well as 64GB Flash while the iPhone only has 32GB a smart move if it?s all about the iPhone?
There is a reason why the iPod Touch technologically isn't an iPhone minus the phone. Apple wants (on purpose) to separate the iPhone and iPod Touch products.
Yes I am. Will they eventually put one in? Yes they will. But Apple will hold if off until the next major revision of the iPod Touch to do so.
With the Nano getting a video camera, the Touch having the exact space for the Nano?s video camera, and proof that at least one model with said video was made, the most likely scenario is that the rumours were likely true. All this conspiracy crap that ignores the fact that the Touch can never be an iPhone and that the Touch has many features and options that already beat the iPhone is bullocks.
There is a reason why the iPod Touch technologically isn't an iPhone minus the phone. Apple wants (on purpose) to separate the iPhone and iPod Touch products.
Really? Apple wants one to be a phone and the other not to be a phone? How about that!
Argue it to death, the fact is macroeconomic factors contributed to Apple's decisions about the latest iPod Touch.
It's obvious in the spaces left for features, that if the economy improves, so will new features be added.
Apple is thinking about it's developers, and keeping the adoption rate to the App Store high.
Software is as important as hardware.
What use is a do it all device if there are only a few thousand who can afford it and no software for it?
Just look how long it took for the PS3 to take off, the high price kept a lot of people off of it.
Anyone want a iPhone without the phone is welcome to get a iPhone and cancel the contract.
A 12 megapixel Kodak camera with zoom can be had for a little over $100.
A crappie 3 mega pixel camera would just really be a waste of money.
Apple made the right decision in my opinion.
Can you buy an iPhone and then upgrade to a different phone and keep the iPhone
I think it is clear from the pics now that a camera was destined for the iPod Touch but is not there for what ever reason. It is very likely that the reported technical reasons are accurate, as I can't see Apple getting this far and then having a plastic spacer produced so they can scrap the camera idea.
While the camera may have the same dimensions as the Nano, one should not assume that it was exactly the same device. It could have had other features they wanted to explore such as higher res video, high res still pics, or auto focus for that matter. Any of these could have been tripping points for the camera. Frankly we don't even know at this moment if the hardware in the Nano even has a still pic mode. In other words maybe the camera in Nano could do stills but they are so bad Apple didn't want to consider them and are suing the sensor only as a video device. Maybe video only wasn't in the game for the Touch.
The expanded Flash capacity is going to make many people happy and frankly is likely to be a bigger draw than the camera would have been. However one thing that hasn't been investigated or reported yet is the amount of RAM installed? I'm wondering if the high end devices went to 256MB, info here would be appreciated. The more RAM the more flexible and interesting the apps that can be installed.
Dave
I think it's likely that the camera will be introduced in a mid-life January refresh of the 3rd gen iPod Touch. I can't see them doing it before the holidays since it would be disruptive to the supply channel at a critical time. But a post-Christmas introduction is definitely possible and would be similar to what was done to the 17" MacBook Pro which was updated but kept non-Unibody when the rest of the Unibodies were released last October, before being replaced with a 17" Unibody just 3 months later in January 2009. If the iTablet is released early next year as predicted, then it'd make sense to give the iPod Touch a mini-refresh whether in features or pricing, perhaps a silent one, at the same time to better realign the product lineup.
Even if it uses the same camera hardware, I'm hoping to differentiate the iPod Touch's camera from the Nano's, the Touch will get photo capability which can probably be helped with software enhancement using the Touch's better processor. The Touch could probably leverage the motion compensation algorithms developed for iMovie.
I'm guessing that the 3rd gen iPod Touch didn't get a digital compass or the oleophobic screen coating? These would both be sensible additions where the coating goes to the quality perception of Apple products, while the digital compass could use wider adoption as a complementary control method with the accelerometer. Beyond the obvious compass direction applications, I would think more advanced algorithms could use the digital compass data to assist the accelerometer is detecting and refining how the device position is changing leading to more accurate controls in things like games (supposedly the Touch's selling point), which can only be a good thing.
Argue it to death, the fact is macroeconomic factors contributed to Apple's decisions about the latest iPod Touch.
It's obvious in the spaces left for features, that if the economy improves, so will new features be added.
Apple is thinking about it's developers, and keeping the adoption rate to the App Store high.
Software is as important as hardware.
What use is a do it all device if there are only a few thousand who can afford it and no software for it?
Just look how long it took for the PS3 to take off, the high price kept a lot of people off of it.
Anyone want a iPhone without the phone is welcome to get a iPhone and cancel the contract.
A 12 megapixel Kodak camera with zoom can be had for a little over $100.
A crappie 3 mega pixel camera would just really be a waste of money.
Apple made the right decision in my opinion.
Can you buy an iPhone and then right after you buy it upgrade to a different phone and keep the iPhone as an iPod touch?
I think the technical reason is BS. Clearly, the camera works in the Nano, so why wouldn't it work in the Touch? I think the real reason is Apple changed it's mind about offering the cheap camera that is in the Nano in the Touch. It will wait until it can fit the iPhone camera in the Touch. I think that is the right thing to do.
How can you make such an absolute statement when the internals and the OS of the two devices are completely different?
I think that Apple knows of technology out there that will allow it to put at least as good a camera in the touch that is in the iPhone and perhaps the camera was not quite ready in time for the September release.