Oh I thought it was 8GB.. my bad! Well, in the case $149 sounds reasonable and they can drop the entry-level model to $69/$79 and be done with the Shuffle once and for all.
What are the chances that the iPod Classic will be discontinued this year?
Dunno, there are still people out there who like the classic because they have too much music to stick on a Touch, and may well already have an iPhone besides. So long as the Classic keeps selling steadily and doesn't require any engineering work done there's no real reason to kill it.
I'd imagine when we start seeing 128GB iPod Touches, that the Classic will be done for though. It seems hard to believe that the classic will even get another storage bump, never mind a full refresh.
The iPod Touch doesn't need an A5. For one it has no competition and secondly it's user base primarily consist of young kids and teenagers that won't care if their iPod has the latest dual core chip and highest specs.
Add a new color and give it a price drop and sales will soar.
I imagine that they'll scale the iPod lineup back this year as well. They can kill the shuffle and the classic this year and reposition the nano into a lower price point.
My guess is we'll see a 4GB Nano priced at $79 and an 8GB Touch priced at $179.
Dunno, there are still people out there who like the classic because they have too much music to stick on a Touch, and may well already have an iPhone besides. So long as the Classic keeps selling steadily and doesn't require any engineering work done there's no real reason to kill it.
I'd imagine when we start seeing 128GB iPod Touches, that the Classic will be done for though. It seems hard to believe that the classic will even get another storage bump, never mind a full refresh.
With iCloud you technically have all your music with you now, so there is no need for the Classic anymore. All you need is a Touch with iCloud and you're set.
You are reading this information the wrong way. The iPod Touch will begin to be phased out this year. It will likely only ship in a single low cost $200 8GB model (in white perhaps). The high end models starting at $300 will be replaced with a new pay as you go iPhone. The iPhone would be able to do everything an iPod Touch can currently do plus have access to cellular voice and/or data. Apple may even throw in some kind of free data service for app and iTunes downloads like the Kindle does for books. If they make the right deals, it could even come with limited free web browsing and iCloud syncing. Perhaps a low cost subscription to play online games. The possibilities are endless. This new iPhone would be in addition to the premium upgrade to the iPhone 4. It would have a thinner design and look a lot like the existing iPod Touch. Expect its camera to be lower resolution than the iPhone. This information is all speculation but it fits well with Apple's strategy and the other leaks.
No matter how many times it's said, a low-cost iPhone that has all the capabilities of the regular iPhone (sans a touch of speed or a slightly better screen), is a very bad idea that will never happen.
You don't undercut the sales of your flagship, world-leading product, at the height of it's popularity by introducing a budget model that does basically the same stuff for half the price.
Eh, where to start? Firstly the iPod that brought Apple back from the dead is the iPod classic the direct descendant from the original iPod.
The iPod Touch is really quite a different device and has very little in common with those early media players. The iPod touch is more closely related to the iPhone or even the iPad, and one could say it is the iPhone from a software perspective, but without 3g (yes the bit that really makes it a phone).
The iPod Touch is in a funny place right now, yes the iPod line is in decline, Apple has already reposition the Nano to be just a music player, it has left the iPod classic there untouched for those who want it, and the iPod Shuffle doesn't really have anywhere else to go, I mean how small can it really get.
My point is that the iPod touch isn't really an iPod, it is much more than that. In fact most people don't even call it an iPod, the name iTouch seems to be everywhere. But analyst love the doom an gloom around the falling revenue coming from the iPod line and the iPod Touch suffers because of this.Maybe we need a name change or something?
Personally i think the iPod Touch will get updated internally - it needs to keep up with the other iOS devices especially it's older sibling the iPhone which both share much of the same software. I think 3g makes sense, this would position the device closer to the iPad (kind of like an iPad Nano) giving the device greater flexibility. As for a white version - that seem to be a no-brainer.
I'm not sure what they are doing this year, but this line of thought is much closer to what I've been thinking as well. Separating the iPod touch from the rest of the iPods makes a lot of sense because the iPod line is indeed dying off, and the iPod touch shouldn't really be a part of that given that it's not really an iPod as you say.
This is a bit of a leap, but I've been thinking that since the iPod touch is really just a small iPad, it might makes sense to rebrand it as such and make iPads in a range of sizes. Then an 'IPod" goes back to being just a music player. On the other hand, if they want to keep the iPod name alive, the iPod touch could simply become "iPod" and be part of a three device strategy, (iPod, iPhone, iPad), and the "old" iPods could be rebranded as music players.
Either way, I think there is a division being made (or about to be) between the iPod touch and the rest of the iPods.
The touch isn't going away anytime soon. It's too much of a gateway to the iPhone and it's very good for people who don't want or can't afford the voice and data service that goes with the iPhone.
I think we'll see some spec bumps like an improved processor and perhaps a better camera, but we need to keep in mind that Apple likes to preserve that $229 starting cost. So, if they can improve the product while maintaining their profit margin, they'll do it.
One interesting rumor is the incorporation of 3G in the touch, so users can buy data from a wireless provider like they can on the iPad. Although I'm not sure how much it would cost to add that capability and how much of a premium Apple would charge for it, it could interest a large enough market segment for Apple to go after.
Storage will be an interesting question. Will the next iPhone and touch bump storage up to 64GB and 128GB, respectively? Flash memory supplies and prices play into this, as well as what Apple has planned for iCloud. Perhaps Apple will try to push people away from having all of their stuff stored locally. Of course, there are folks like me who would love to see a 64GB iPhone in the next version.
And would a theoretical 128GB iPod touch spell the end of the classic? On a per gigabyte basis, the classic is by far the least expensive way to store a large amount of music -- $249 for 160GB versus $399 for a possible 128GB touch. Apple could have done a lot with the classic if it really wanted to. Though the Zune was a failure for Microsoft, the device did do some things that I wouldn't mind seeing incorporated in a updated classic, such as a larger screen, FM capability, and wi-fi for buying music or even taking advantage of Air Play.
If Apple wasn't making money on the classic, then they would have discontinued it. I suspect folks with really large libraries, audiophiles who prefer their music ripped in a lossless format, and DJs still gravitate toward the classic. I still have a classic and prefer to use that as my car iPod because I can pause, advance, or rewind using the click wheel, even though I own an iPhone.
The market demand, however, simply isn't there like it used to be for models like the classic. Although people still buy and use nanos, shuffles, and even classics, the money and demand are in the iOS arena with the touch, iPhone, and iPad.
If Apple could differentiate the line enough between the iPad Nano (love that name!) and the iPhone so it was not considered a threat to iPhone sales, I could see it becoming a huge worldwide seller. It needs GPS and 3G to become a truly viable entry level iDevice - iCloud, iMessage, location based services are the disruptive features that could signal the turning point in the war to beat the service providers back to where they belong: dumb pipes.
And how about a new 3G VOIP service to pound the nail in: EarTime!
I don't think the touch is going anywhere anytime soon, apple just stated that they were appropriating money from now on for icloud and software updates for the touch. That Rowan sound like a company who's about to phase it out for a prepaid iPhone. I though it was likely that they would expand to that and make a 5" version, and it USB and should never be classified as an iPad, a smaller screen needs different apps. Anyways I no longer think they will make it, even though I think there is definitely a market for it.....with 5 inch screen, A5, it.
The iPod Touch doesn't need an A5. For one it has no competition and secondly it's user base primarily consist of young kids and teenagers that won't care if their iPod has the latest dual core chip and highest specs.
Have you ever met a teenager?
Many of them use the iPod for gaming which benefits greatly from better CPUs and GPUs.
I was holding out on buying an iPod touch. The one of the main uses would actually be a google-voice based phone when in range of wifi... i have a work cell phone, but obviously i would love something with the iOS interface, play my pandora music when i'm home (outside patio area via boom box doc).
is the A5 processor allow it to be dual-core? If it's nothing major, I guess I should just pull the trigger on current gen?
Your plan actually makes more sense. I forgot about the other rumors. Sorry to offend any iPod touch users out there! My only iOS device is a iPod Touch 4G 64 GB that is jailbroken on iOS 4.3.3 untethered.
My comment was aimed at the main story not your reply Matthew. Sorry for the confusion.
The only spec I expect to see 100% is an A5 chip. 80% chance that it will get a 3 MP camera (like it was wrongly predicted in 2009 and 2010 it might get), and a 50% chance of 128GB storage. The only things we really need are those features. Other commenters, what else do you think it needs?
Give it 3G like the iPad and I will buy one ASAP! I don't want an iPhone. I want a small version of my Ipad.
Keep in mind that Apple said that it has a major shift in product strategy coming in the next quarter during its earnings call. This change is expected to impact its earnings negatively initially. A $300 low end pay as you go iPhone as a full replacement for the iPod Touch could be the change they were talking about. They will lose revenues from the iPod Touch sales and also have lower profit margins from the first few quarters of the phone sales. They will plan to make that back as component costs go down, their earnings from deals with carriers increases and unit counts explode. In a year though we should see the lowest priced iPhone cost about $200 without a contract and work on every carrier. That would be game changing.
I was holding out on buying an iPod touch. The one of the main uses would actually be a google-voice based phone when in range of wifi... i have a work cell phone, but obviously i would love something with the iOS interface, play my pandora music when i'm home (outside patio area via boom box doc).
is the A5 processor allow it to be dual-core? If it's nothing major, I guess I should just pull the trigger on current gen?
The A5 is dual core and probably worth waiting for at this point.
Comments
Apple currently sells a 16GB nano for $179.
That would only be a $30 price drop.
Oh I thought it was 8GB.. my bad! Well, in the case $149 sounds reasonable and they can drop the entry-level model to $69/$79 and be done with the Shuffle once and for all.
What are the chances that the iPod Classic will be discontinued this year?
Dunno, there are still people out there who like the classic because they have too much music to stick on a Touch, and may well already have an iPhone besides. So long as the Classic keeps selling steadily and doesn't require any engineering work done there's no real reason to kill it.
I'd imagine when we start seeing 128GB iPod Touches, that the Classic will be done for though. It seems hard to believe that the classic will even get another storage bump, never mind a full refresh.
Add a new color and give it a price drop and sales will soar.
I imagine that they'll scale the iPod lineup back this year as well. They can kill the shuffle and the classic this year and reposition the nano into a lower price point.
My guess is we'll see a 4GB Nano priced at $79 and an 8GB Touch priced at $179.
Dunno, there are still people out there who like the classic because they have too much music to stick on a Touch, and may well already have an iPhone besides. So long as the Classic keeps selling steadily and doesn't require any engineering work done there's no real reason to kill it.
I'd imagine when we start seeing 128GB iPod Touches, that the Classic will be done for though. It seems hard to believe that the classic will even get another storage bump, never mind a full refresh.
With iCloud you technically have all your music with you now, so there is no need for the Classic anymore. All you need is a Touch with iCloud and you're set.
I also hope the new iPod Touch and iPhone get a 4" screen...
WHY.
filler.
You are reading this information the wrong way. The iPod Touch will begin to be phased out this year. It will likely only ship in a single low cost $200 8GB model (in white perhaps). The high end models starting at $300 will be replaced with a new pay as you go iPhone. The iPhone would be able to do everything an iPod Touch can currently do plus have access to cellular voice and/or data. Apple may even throw in some kind of free data service for app and iTunes downloads like the Kindle does for books. If they make the right deals, it could even come with limited free web browsing and iCloud syncing. Perhaps a low cost subscription to play online games. The possibilities are endless. This new iPhone would be in addition to the premium upgrade to the iPhone 4. It would have a thinner design and look a lot like the existing iPod Touch. Expect its camera to be lower resolution than the iPhone. This information is all speculation but it fits well with Apple's strategy and the other leaks.
No matter how many times it's said, a low-cost iPhone that has all the capabilities of the regular iPhone (sans a touch of speed or a slightly better screen), is a very bad idea that will never happen.
You don't undercut the sales of your flagship, world-leading product, at the height of it's popularity by introducing a budget model that does basically the same stuff for half the price.
Eh, where to start? Firstly the iPod that brought Apple back from the dead is the iPod classic the direct descendant from the original iPod.
The iPod Touch is really quite a different device and has very little in common with those early media players. The iPod touch is more closely related to the iPhone or even the iPad, and one could say it is the iPhone from a software perspective, but without 3g (yes the bit that really makes it a phone).
The iPod Touch is in a funny place right now, yes the iPod line is in decline, Apple has already reposition the Nano to be just a music player, it has left the iPod classic there untouched for those who want it, and the iPod Shuffle doesn't really have anywhere else to go, I mean how small can it really get.
My point is that the iPod touch isn't really an iPod, it is much more than that. In fact most people don't even call it an iPod, the name iTouch seems to be everywhere. But analyst love the doom an gloom around the falling revenue coming from the iPod line and the iPod Touch suffers because of this.Maybe we need a name change or something?
Personally i think the iPod Touch will get updated internally - it needs to keep up with the other iOS devices especially it's older sibling the iPhone which both share much of the same software. I think 3g makes sense, this would position the device closer to the iPad (kind of like an iPad Nano) giving the device greater flexibility. As for a white version - that seem to be a no-brainer.
I'm not sure what they are doing this year, but this line of thought is much closer to what I've been thinking as well. Separating the iPod touch from the rest of the iPods makes a lot of sense because the iPod line is indeed dying off, and the iPod touch shouldn't really be a part of that given that it's not really an iPod as you say.
This is a bit of a leap, but I've been thinking that since the iPod touch is really just a small iPad, it might makes sense to rebrand it as such and make iPads in a range of sizes. Then an 'IPod" goes back to being just a music player. On the other hand, if they want to keep the iPod name alive, the iPod touch could simply become "iPod" and be part of a three device strategy, (iPod, iPhone, iPad), and the "old" iPods could be rebranded as music players.
Either way, I think there is a division being made (or about to be) between the iPod touch and the rest of the iPods.
I just want the iPod Touch to get Garage Band. I know it can run on an A4 but the A5 would be better.
Agreed, but on both iPod Touch and the iPad, we need an easier, better supported means of getting better quality line-in audio for recording.
I think we'll see some spec bumps like an improved processor and perhaps a better camera, but we need to keep in mind that Apple likes to preserve that $229 starting cost. So, if they can improve the product while maintaining their profit margin, they'll do it.
One interesting rumor is the incorporation of 3G in the touch, so users can buy data from a wireless provider like they can on the iPad. Although I'm not sure how much it would cost to add that capability and how much of a premium Apple would charge for it, it could interest a large enough market segment for Apple to go after.
Storage will be an interesting question. Will the next iPhone and touch bump storage up to 64GB and 128GB, respectively? Flash memory supplies and prices play into this, as well as what Apple has planned for iCloud. Perhaps Apple will try to push people away from having all of their stuff stored locally. Of course, there are folks like me who would love to see a 64GB iPhone in the next version.
And would a theoretical 128GB iPod touch spell the end of the classic? On a per gigabyte basis, the classic is by far the least expensive way to store a large amount of music -- $249 for 160GB versus $399 for a possible 128GB touch. Apple could have done a lot with the classic if it really wanted to. Though the Zune was a failure for Microsoft, the device did do some things that I wouldn't mind seeing incorporated in a updated classic, such as a larger screen, FM capability, and wi-fi for buying music or even taking advantage of Air Play.
If Apple wasn't making money on the classic, then they would have discontinued it. I suspect folks with really large libraries, audiophiles who prefer their music ripped in a lossless format, and DJs still gravitate toward the classic. I still have a classic and prefer to use that as my car iPod because I can pause, advance, or rewind using the click wheel, even though I own an iPhone.
The market demand, however, simply isn't there like it used to be for models like the classic. Although people still buy and use nanos, shuffles, and even classics, the money and demand are in the iOS arena with the touch, iPhone, and iPad.
And how about a new 3G VOIP service to pound the nail in: EarTime!
The iPod Touch doesn't need an A5. For one it has no competition and secondly it's user base primarily consist of young kids and teenagers that won't care if their iPod has the latest dual core chip and highest specs.
Have you ever met a teenager?
Many of them use the iPod for gaming which benefits greatly from better CPUs and GPUs.
is the A5 processor allow it to be dual-core? If it's nothing major, I guess I should just pull the trigger on current gen?
Your plan actually makes more sense. I forgot about the other rumors. Sorry to offend any iPod touch users out there! My only iOS device is a iPod Touch 4G 64 GB that is jailbroken on iOS 4.3.3 untethered.
My comment was aimed at the main story not your reply Matthew. Sorry for the confusion.
The only spec I expect to see 100% is an A5 chip. 80% chance that it will get a 3 MP camera (like it was wrongly predicted in 2009 and 2010 it might get), and a 50% chance of 128GB storage. The only things we really need are those features. Other commenters, what else do you think it needs?
Give it 3G like the iPad and I will buy one ASAP! I don't want an iPhone. I want a small version of my Ipad.
I was holding out on buying an iPod touch. The one of the main uses would actually be a google-voice based phone when in range of wifi... i have a work cell phone, but obviously i would love something with the iOS interface, play my pandora music when i'm home (outside patio area via boom box doc).
is the A5 processor allow it to be dual-core? If it's nothing major, I guess I should just pull the trigger on current gen?
The A5 is dual core and probably worth waiting for at this point.