Video offers glimpse at Apple's revamped 16GB iPod touch
After a surprise launch of a new entry-level iPod touch, Apple's latest 16-gigabyte model is now out in the wild, and was captured on video by one of the first buyers.
Ben Pasternak of Sydney, Australia, got his hands on the new 16-gigabyte fifth-generation iPod touch, and captured the above footage showing off the new model. The back of the media player lacks the iSight camera and the wrist strap loop.
Apple surprised on Thursday when it unveiled the new basic iPod touch model for $229 in its online store. Pasternak's hands-on indicates that inventory of the updated media player is also beginning to appear in the company's retail locations.
While the new model lacks a rear-facing camera and wrist loop, it does add a 4-inch Retina display, dual-core A5 chip, and includes Apple EarPods. Those additions put it on par with Apple's higher end 32- and 64-gigabyte offerings.
The entry-level iPod touch does lack the color options of its more expensive siblings, however. The only option available is a black-on-silver design.
The new 16-gigabyte iPod touch also retains the forward facing FaceTime camera, and has the same connectivity options, including Apple's new, smaller Lightning connector. The lack of the camera and wrist strap holding button has also reduced the device's weight to 3.04 ounces.
Previously, the fifth-generation iPod touch debuted in September of 2012 without a 16-gigabyte option. Instead, Apple offered the fourth-generation iPod touch, with a slower processor and smaller screen, for $199.
Ben Pasternak of Sydney, Australia, got his hands on the new 16-gigabyte fifth-generation iPod touch, and captured the above footage showing off the new model. The back of the media player lacks the iSight camera and the wrist strap loop.
Apple surprised on Thursday when it unveiled the new basic iPod touch model for $229 in its online store. Pasternak's hands-on indicates that inventory of the updated media player is also beginning to appear in the company's retail locations.
While the new model lacks a rear-facing camera and wrist loop, it does add a 4-inch Retina display, dual-core A5 chip, and includes Apple EarPods. Those additions put it on par with Apple's higher end 32- and 64-gigabyte offerings.
The entry-level iPod touch does lack the color options of its more expensive siblings, however. The only option available is a black-on-silver design.
The new 16-gigabyte iPod touch also retains the forward facing FaceTime camera, and has the same connectivity options, including Apple's new, smaller Lightning connector. The lack of the camera and wrist strap holding button has also reduced the device's weight to 3.04 ounces.
Previously, the fifth-generation iPod touch debuted in September of 2012 without a 16-gigabyte option. Instead, Apple offered the fourth-generation iPod touch, with a slower processor and smaller screen, for $199.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by iMonus
Is this the same approach the 'budget iPhone' will take? Dumbed down?
Yup, that would make sense. Reduce features rather than build quality to reduce cost. If you want cheap/entry level, then you get what you pay for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm
Quote:
Originally Posted by iMonus
Is this the same approach the 'budget iPhone' will take? Dumbed down?
Yup, that would make sense. Reduce features rather than build quality to reduce cost. If you want cheap/entry level, then you get what you pay for.
If you guys believe that Apple would go and not use a camera on a new iPhone line... Oh boy.
Perhaps the reason for no camera is this iPod could be used as a remote for the new Apple TV or perhaps for iPhone users who don't need a second camera or for teenage gamers who can't afford more. Still plays all the apps, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Maybe this will put to rest the idea that a cheap iPhone has to be plastic. But losing the camera was a bad idea I think. Wonder what the reasoning was behind that?
In my humble opinion, the camera priorities aren't right.
On a tablet and iPod, the best camera should be front facing, for pictures, facetime and skype...
Agree. An iPhone (cheaper version or not) without a camera would be DOA. Apple isn't stupid.
I guess if you're egocentric enough, that makes sense.
Gahhh...it basically floats if you let go of it.
Perhaps they're keeping the camera components back to put into the 'much rumoured' cheap iPhone.
Presumably they need only add cellular hardware to this iPod Touch and you have a phone for circa $300.
This model is the perfect one for Apple to be testing the waters of removing one camera. There's not any incentive to get an iPodTouch over an iPhone if the price isn't much better. There may be numbers that say the recent iPod touch sell decently but I've never seen one in NYC in the wild. 13 year olds have iPhones.
Makes perfect sense to differentiate them more. Need a great camera both front and rear? This isn't your model.
Makes perfect sense to differentiate them more. Need a great camera both front and rear? This isn't your model.
I tend to agree. From a consumer perspective, I think Apple ditched the wrong camera. I'd match rather have the iSight camera so I could use the Touch as a regular camera and would use that far more often than the FaceTime camera. But from a business perspective, Apple is all about the upsell...want the iSight camera, buy the more expensive model. Plus Apple still wants to push their FaceTime technology and the FaceTime camera is going to be cheaper than the iSight camera.Quote:
Originally Posted by iMonus
Is this the same approach the 'budget iPhone' will take? Dumbed down?
They shaved $70 by removing the camera and halving the storage.
Using the same formula, the 8gb, cameraless iPhone 5 would be $579. Not really budget territory...
The iPhone 4s would get knocked down to $475.
The iPhone 4 would go to $380.
I can't see Apple making an iPhone without a camera...
No. I think by "dumbing down" they were suggesting Apple would actually lower the intelligence of the thing.
Who are they trying to target here?
Somebody has to be really hurting for money if they can't afford a measly $70 more, which gives them double the storage space and the back camera that comes with the regular model.
But if somebody doesn't have any use at all for the back camera, and if somebody does not need more than 16Gigs of storage space, and if somebody is looking to save a few bucks, then I guess that this new iPod Touch would be a good solution for them. I guess that it's good enough for parents to give to their kids.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd
This model is the perfect one for Apple to be testing the waters of removing one camera. There's not any incentive to get an iPodTouch over an iPhone if the price isn't much better. There may be numbers that say the recent iPod touch sell decently but I've never seen one in NYC in the wild. 13 year olds have iPhones.
Makes perfect sense to differentiate them more. Need a great camera both front and rear? This isn't your model.
I also don't see many in the wild, but I've seen a lot of iPod Touches in domestic situations. Some parents I've talked to say it's perfect for their teens, providing all the functionality of an iPhone except the cellular radio.
As an 'entry level' iPod touch, it's a good one for the car (iTunes jukebox), still allows facetime/skype calls (sans phone features), useful apps, games etc. If someone needs a photo camera too, just spring for the 32GB+ versions… an extra $70 for double the memory and a camera? It's not a huge difference if you need it.
I think this will sell well as a more affordable niche device.
Thinking about it more, some might wonder why Apple are introducing any 'new' iPods at all with the sales decreasing… they clearly know something we don't about their target market.