There is if Apple could reimagine what a hand held computer is potentially useful for. Apple seems to be missing the boat here as there are many industrial/commercial applications for a handheld computer without cell access. It is really just a matter of adding the right feature sets to iOS and providing an unobstructed access to specialized hardware.
Lets look at it this way, the music player market is in a nose dive. There is nothing especially bad about that but that doesn't mean that hardware like Touch needs to fade away, they just need to consider expanded markets for the device.
I think the iPod touch would sell better if it were recast as an "iPad pocket" or some such. That's how I use mine - less an iPhone without the phone, and more an iPad that fits in my pocket. With wi-fi hotspots becoming increasingly ubiquitous - many new cars offer 4G - a wifi-only device should be becoming more relevant, not less.
I don't know whether or not the A7 can support Apple Pay. I hope and expect the new iPod Touch to support Apple Pay, so perhaps it will get an A8 (if the A7 cannot support Apple Pay).
The S1 is a 32-bit chip. The main assertion of the article (which perhaps might be wrong) is that the new iPod Touch will have a 64-bit chip. Assuming that the iPod Touch will continue to have a display resolution of 1136x640 (six times more pixels than the 42mm Apple Watch), how well would an S1 drive that display (watching movies or playing games)?
I could more easily imagine an S1 chip in an iPod nano if Apple were to decide that the nano should support Apple Pay. Far-fetched? Maybe not.
But the iPod market (Nano not Touch) is mature and declining to the point that it doesn't even warrant its own page on Apple.com anymore.
I think part of the reason for the decline is the gap between the 2GB Shuffle for $49. and the 16GB Nano for $149.
I think a 4GB Nano for $99. would hit the sweet spot nicely.
The shuffle still serves an important market for Apple, it's both an entry product for iTunes, and a mobile music player for all manner of activities. I see the ?Watch eventually replacing it as the prices come down. On the other hand, as a hard-wired product it doesn't serve Apple's push for streaming music services. It's also the last Apple mobile product that doesn't use a lightning connector. I'd like to see Apple add a Bluetooth radio for wireless transfer from the iPhone, just like the watch, as well as wireless headphone use. This would also add control of streaming from Apple Music. Also upgrade the storage to 4GB. Adding a lightning connector would provide additional room, but would require a custom lightning headphone, or wireless headphone. Since Apple just released specs for Lightning headphones this past December, there's a possibility Apple might pursue this path ... Which could pave the way for lightning headphones for the iPhone, thus eliminating the largest port left on their mobile devices, allowing them to go even thinner.
The nano, less so. The ?Watch is within the grasp of most people to replace the nano, though it will need more onboard storage first, and a slightly lower price point, which the gen 1 Watch may hit when gen 2 comes out. A better shuffle at $99, and a cheaper Watch at $249, would go along way toward replacing the nano.
Well, I think you have to look what you can buy and get for your money. And honestly as a music player and portable gaming device the ipod touch is a little overpriced.
That said, I can see Apple really wanting to push a new ipod device as a portable wifi enabled Apple Radio. This would be great for playing games, listening to music, and giving to kids...but $200.00 is just not the sweet price point for that market. I think a price drop to $149.99 would be a better deal. $149.99 for 32 GB and $199.99 for 64 GB.
Of course the Nano's price would have to drop to $100.00. Though I would probably make it $100.00 with wifi capabilities to really push Apple Radio more.
Finally, you could leave the Shuffles price the same...perhaps up the memory to 4 GB.
Apple doesn't have to phase out good legacy hardware...it just needs to make the value of those products more appealing.
Well, I think you have to look what you can buy and get for your money. And honestly as a music player and portable gaming device the ipod touch is a little overpriced.
That said, I can see Apple really wanting to push a new ipod device as a portable wifi enabled Apple Radio. This would be great for playing games, listening to music, and giving to kids...but $200.00 is just not the sweet price point for that market. I think a price drop to $149.99 would be a better deal. $149.99 for 32 GB and $199.99 for 64 GB.
Of course the Nano's price would have to drop to $100.00. Though I would probably make it $100.00 with wifi capabilities to really push Apple Radio more.
Finally, you could leave the Shuffles price the same...perhaps up the memory to 4 GB.
Apple doesn't have to phase out good legacy hardware...it just needs to make the value of those products more appealing.
Your post got me to thinking...what if the iPod Touch is also Apple's way of bringing the kiddies into the Apple ecosystem. At a tender age the kiddies learn how to use iTunes, the App Store, and iOS-cetric apps. In addition, the kiddies get used to a fast responsive touch product while accumulating a small investment in music and apps. It all adds up to making a young user less satisfied with going outside of Apple for a tablet or phone. They even get used to paying a bit more for hardware. The iPod Touch does even more then advertising could do — and Apple makes a small profit instead of paying out ad dollars.
Meanwhile, Apple's prime iOS competitors have nothing to offer in the form of a introductory product like the iPod Touch... Apple covers the cost spectrum like a blanket.
Your post got me to thinking...what if the iPod Touch is also Apple's way of bringing the kiddies into the Apple ecosystem. At a tender age the kiddies learn how to use iTunes, the App Store, and iOS-cetric apps. In addition, the kiddies get used to a fast responsive touch product while accumulating a small investment in music and apps. It all adds up to making a young user less satisfied with going outside of Apple for a tablet or phone. They even get used to paying a bit more for hardware. The iPod Touch does even more then advertising could do — and Apple makes a small profit instead of paying out ad dollars.
Meanwhile, Apple's prime iOS competitors have nothing to offer in the form of a introductory product like the iPod Touch... Apple covers the cost spectrum like a blanket.
Thanks, this is something to think about. I know more parents are just buying their kids tablets, or smart phones, but if you can try to get kids and teens in at an early age the better. Remember, that each app purchased and used/played from the app store is one more app that makes it harder to switch over to another platform. Who wants to buy the software they already bought over again. Who wants to relearn how to do tasks they already mastered with a program/device they already have.
Comments
There is if Apple could reimagine what a hand held computer is potentially useful for. Apple seems to be missing the boat here as there are many industrial/commercial applications for a handheld computer without cell access. It is really just a matter of adding the right feature sets to iOS and providing an unobstructed access to specialized hardware.
Lets look at it this way, the music player market is in a nose dive. There is nothing especially bad about that but that doesn't mean that hardware like Touch needs to fade away, they just need to consider expanded markets for the device.
I think the iPod touch would sell better if it were recast as an "iPad pocket" or some such. That's how I use mine - less an iPhone without the phone, and more an iPad that fits in my pocket. With wi-fi hotspots becoming increasingly ubiquitous - many new cars offer 4G - a wifi-only device should be becoming more relevant, not less.
There's always the S1.
There's always the S1.
The S1 is a 32-bit chip. The main assertion of the article (which perhaps might be wrong) is that the new iPod Touch will have a 64-bit chip. Assuming that the iPod Touch will continue to have a display resolution of 1136x640 (six times more pixels than the 42mm Apple Watch), how well would an S1 drive that display (watching movies or playing games)?
I could more easily imagine an S1 chip in an iPod nano if Apple were to decide that the nano should support Apple Pay. Far-fetched? Maybe not.
The nano, less so. The ?Watch is within the grasp of most people to replace the nano, though it will need more onboard storage first, and a slightly lower price point, which the gen 1 Watch may hit when gen 2 comes out. A better shuffle at $99, and a cheaper Watch at $249, would go along way toward replacing the nano.
Well, I think you have to look what you can buy and get for your money. And honestly as a music player and portable gaming device the ipod touch is a little overpriced.
That said, I can see Apple really wanting to push a new ipod device as a portable wifi enabled Apple Radio. This would be great for playing games, listening to music, and giving to kids...but $200.00 is just not the sweet price point for that market. I think a price drop to $149.99 would be a better deal. $149.99 for 32 GB and $199.99 for 64 GB.
Of course the Nano's price would have to drop to $100.00. Though I would probably make it $100.00 with wifi capabilities to really push Apple Radio more.
Finally, you could leave the Shuffles price the same...perhaps up the memory to 4 GB.
Apple doesn't have to phase out good legacy hardware...it just needs to make the value of those products more appealing.
Well, I think you have to look what you can buy and get for your money. And honestly as a music player and portable gaming device the ipod touch is a little overpriced.
That said, I can see Apple really wanting to push a new ipod device as a portable wifi enabled Apple Radio. This would be great for playing games, listening to music, and giving to kids...but $200.00 is just not the sweet price point for that market. I think a price drop to $149.99 would be a better deal. $149.99 for 32 GB and $199.99 for 64 GB.
Of course the Nano's price would have to drop to $100.00. Though I would probably make it $100.00 with wifi capabilities to really push Apple Radio more.
Finally, you could leave the Shuffles price the same...perhaps up the memory to 4 GB.
Apple doesn't have to phase out good legacy hardware...it just needs to make the value of those products more appealing.
Your post got me to thinking...what if the iPod Touch is also Apple's way of bringing the kiddies into the Apple ecosystem. At a tender age the kiddies learn how to use iTunes, the App Store, and iOS-cetric apps. In addition, the kiddies get used to a fast responsive touch product while accumulating a small investment in music and apps. It all adds up to making a young user less satisfied with going outside of Apple for a tablet or phone. They even get used to paying a bit more for hardware. The iPod Touch does even more then advertising could do — and Apple makes a small profit instead of paying out ad dollars.
Meanwhile, Apple's prime iOS competitors have nothing to offer in the form of a introductory product like the iPod Touch... Apple covers the cost spectrum like a blanket.
how about first repairing the Podcasts app and giving it a usable interface? ditto iTunes.
The iPod Touch update - Probably the last it'll ever receive before quietly fading into the sunset of gentle obsolescence...
At well under half the price of an iPhone it will be some time before it is obsolete. (Not that Apple will necessarily continue to produce them.)
(£200 for a Touch versus £500 for a 5S and £620 for a 6.)
If you have not tried it yet, I would suggest Overcast to handle podcasts
Your post got me to thinking...what if the iPod Touch is also Apple's way of bringing the kiddies into the Apple ecosystem. At a tender age the kiddies learn how to use iTunes, the App Store, and iOS-cetric apps. In addition, the kiddies get used to a fast responsive touch product while accumulating a small investment in music and apps. It all adds up to making a young user less satisfied with going outside of Apple for a tablet or phone. They even get used to paying a bit more for hardware. The iPod Touch does even more then advertising could do — and Apple makes a small profit instead of paying out ad dollars.
Meanwhile, Apple's prime iOS competitors have nothing to offer in the form of a introductory product like the iPod Touch... Apple covers the cost spectrum like a blanket.
Thanks, this is something to think about. I know more parents are just buying their kids tablets, or smart phones, but if you can try to get kids and teens in at an early age the better. Remember, that each app purchased and used/played from the app store is one more app that makes it harder to switch over to another platform. Who wants to buy the software they already bought over again. Who wants to relearn how to do tasks they already mastered with a program/device they already have.
Maybe it was July 14 2016?