2019 iPod touch: Everything you need to know

Posted:
in General Discussion edited May 29
Apple has just updated the last remaining iPod, the iPod touch, for 2019 with an A10 Fusion processor and storage boost. Here is everything you need to know about Tuesday's release.

iPod touch
iPod touch colors


The new 2019 seventh generation iPod touch retains much of the previous generation, minus the processor and storage. Externally it has the same 4-inch Retina display, an 8MP rear camera, and a 1.2MP front-facing "selfie" camera. The Home button is sticking around, and neither Touch ID nor Face ID are present.

Apple did, however, update the processor by two generations. What was previously an A8 processor is now Apple's A10 Fusion processor, the same one that debuted with the iPhone 7. This new chipset will deliver twice the performance and three times the graphics capabilities as before.






What that means, other than a snappier device, was Apple was able to unlock features previously kept out of Apple's iPod. There is now support for ARKit and AR games/apps as well as support for Group FaceTime with up to 32 participants.

iPod touch 2019 specs


While this update seems small, the iPod touch still sells reasonably well. It is a low-cost device which appeals to many somewhat niche markets like developers who need a more affordable testing device than another iPhone and parents who want a device for their children.

The kids market seems to be a big target for Apple with this update. Kids won't necessarily need 4K video or Face ID that comes with Apple's high-end phones. Thanks to the new performance, Apple retains iOS support for years to come. The A8 processor in the sixth generation iPod Touch that Tuesday's release replaced will likely not support iOS 13 that Apple is set to announce during WWDC '19. That being the case, the seventh generation can pick up and continue to support new features.

It is also key for the new device to support games including the upcoming Apple Arcade subscription service and augmented reality titles.

Where to buy

B&H is currently accepting preorders for the seventh-generation iPod touch in a variety of colors and storage capacities.

32GB iPod touch (2019) 128GB iPod touch (2019) 256GB iPod touch (2019)
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 54
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,488member
    I'm all for options and choices. Seems strange there isn't a 512G or even 1TB option. Or a $99 option - although I expect in a year there will be.
  • Reply 2 of 54
    seanismorrisseanismorris Posts: 1,085member
    Or... you could just give the kids your old phone.
    chemengin1williamlondonchasm
  • Reply 3 of 54
    n2itivguyn2itivguy Posts: 68member
    The iPod Touch could’ve (should’ve?) been the new handheld gaming machine had Apple “got” gaming when that category took off in the App Store. Alas…
    anantksundaramelijahg
  • Reply 4 of 54
    smaffeismaffei Posts: 220member
    Apple should have made the base model 64Gb for $199.

    But, of course Tim and his cronies won't because they know 64Gb is the sweet spot everyone wants. Get the user to pay $100 more for 128Gb. Milkers.
    pulseimagesentropyselijahgbigpicswilliamlondon
  • Reply 5 of 54
    bonobobbonobob Posts: 200member

    The A8 processor in the sixth generation iPod Touch that Tuesday's release replaced will likely not support iOS 13 that Apple is set to announce during WWDC '19. That being the case, the seventh generation can pick up and continue to support new features.
    The A7 processor (iPhone 5S) is currently supported.  I suspect it will lose support in September, but the A8 (iPhone 6) will continue to get support for another year.  Besides which, they've been selling these 6G Touches up until this announcement.  It would be a dirty trick to drop support in just a few months.
    1STnTENDERBITSsmiffy31pulseimageselijahgbaconstangredgeminipa
  • Reply 6 of 54
    You don't really need anything more than 32GB for a device that's mainly oriented around games. Apple has made it easy to move games on/off your device at will without losing your save game data etc.
  • Reply 7 of 54
    smaffeismaffei Posts: 220member
    You don't really need anything more than 32GB for a device that's mainly oriented around games. Apple has made it easy to move games on/off your device at will without losing your save game data etc.
    Local storage for music. 64Gb is ideal for most people.
    elijahg
  • Reply 8 of 54
    jcs2305jcs2305 Posts: 828member
    smaffei said:
    Apple should have made the base model 64Gb for $199.

    But, of course Tim and his cronies won't because they know 64Gb is the sweet spot everyone wants. Get the user to pay $100 more for 128Gb. Milkers.
    Seriously????  It's $100.00 more for 3x the storage... Oh the horror!  Give me a break.  It's a music player not a phone.
    edited May 28 StrangeDaysracerhomie3jeffharrislolliverbaconstangpscooter63redgeminipa
  • Reply 9 of 54
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,488member
    jcs2305 said:
    smaffei said:
    Apple should have made the base model 64Gb for $199.

    But, of course Tim and his cronies won't because they know 64Gb is the sweet spot everyone wants. Get the user to pay $100 more for 128Gb. Milkers.
    Seriously????  It's $100.00 more for 3x the storage... Oh the horror!  Give me a break.  It's a music player not a phone.
    Is it possible to attach a lightning hard drive to hold more music to play through iTunes? Asking for a friend.
  • Reply 10 of 54
    smaffei said: Local storage for music. 64Gb is ideal for most people.
    If your goal is to carry the bulk of your owned library around, I can see it. But that type of approach is becoming less common with access to streaming music services that allow you to add/remove offline listening files at will as long as you have a current subscription. I listen to music all the time and have extensive on-device playlists + full albums downloaded from Apple Music and it currently only takes up 6.5GB. The balance between connected/unconnected listening makes it easy to keep the size under control. 
    racerhomie3lolliverchasmredgeminipa
  • Reply 11 of 54
    pulseimagespulseimages Posts: 122member
    jcs2305 said:
    smaffei said:
    Apple should have made the base model 64Gb for $199.

    But, of course Tim and his cronies won't because they know 64Gb is the sweet spot everyone wants. Get the user to pay $100 more for 128Gb. Milkers.
    Seriously????  It's $100.00 more for 3x the storage... Oh the horror!  Give me a break.  It's a music player not a phone.
    I used it as a place to transfer my photos from my Canon 6D and work on/upload in the field before I got my iPhone. The 128GB model came in handy. 
    baconstang
  • Reply 12 of 54
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,581member
    smaffei said:
    Apple should have made the base model 64Gb for $199.

    But, of course Tim and his cronies won't because they know 64Gb is the sweet spot everyone wants. Get the user to pay $100 more for 128Gb. Milkers.
    Good lord, the whining. Remind me never to tell you about my first MP3 player — the Diamond Rio. it had 32MB of storage. Yup, that’s about 30 mins of 128kbs music. It was $200 (edit: so about $315 today.)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rio_PMP300
    edited May 28 foregoneconclusionracerhomie3lolliverwilliamlondonbaconstangpscooter63suddenly newton
  • Reply 13 of 54
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,194member
    smaffei said:
    Apple should have made the base model 64Gb for $199.

    But, of course Tim and his cronies won't because they know 64Gb is the sweet spot everyone wants. Get the user to pay $100 more for 128Gb. Milkers.
    I always say Phil Schiller’s middle name is upsell.
    decoderringdavgregelijahgwilliamlondonsmaffei
  • Reply 14 of 54
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,194member
    jcs2305 said:
    smaffei said:
    Apple should have made the base model 64Gb for $199.

    But, of course Tim and his cronies won't because they know 64Gb is the sweet spot everyone wants. Get the user to pay $100 more for 128Gb. Milkers.
    Seriously????  It's $100.00 more for 3x the storage... Oh the horror!  Give me a break.  It's a music player not a phone.
    Is that you Phil?
    elijahgwilliamlondon
  • Reply 15 of 54
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 1,970member
    bonobob said:

    The A8 processor in the sixth generation iPod Touch that Tuesday's release replaced will likely not support iOS 13 that Apple is set to announce during WWDC '19. That being the case, the seventh generation can pick up and continue to support new features.
    The A7 processor (iPhone 5S) is currently supported.  I suspect it will lose support in September, but the A8 (iPhone 6) will continue to get support for another year.  Besides which, they've been selling these 6G Touches up until this announcement.  It would be a dirty trick to drop support in just a few months.
    "but the A8 (iPhone 6) will continue to get support for another year."

    I highly doubt it.  At the very least, devices with less than 2GB RAM will not be supported.  Personally, I would go as far as to say that any device with older than A10 SoC will not be supported.
    chemengin1
  • Reply 16 of 54
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 1,970member
    smaffei said:
    Apple should have made the base model 64Gb for $199.

    But, of course Tim and his cronies won't because they know 64Gb is the sweet spot everyone wants. Get the user to pay $100 more for 128Gb. Milkers.
    Good lord, the whining. Remind me never to tell you about my first MP3 player — the Diamond Rio. it had 32MB of storage. Yup, that’s about 30 mins of 128kbs music. It was $200.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rio_PMP300
    What you paid for, for a shitty MP3 player many years ago is irrelevant.  Storage costs have dropped significantly since that device has been on sale. Maybe if you came back down to reality and realized not all of Apple's moves are consumer-friendly you would know that.
    chemengin1bigpicswilliamlondonelijahgpscooter63
  • Reply 17 of 54
    StrangeDays said: Remind me never to tell you about my first MP3 player — the Diamond Rio. it had 32MB of storage. Yup, that’s about 30 mins of 128kbs music. It was $200.
    The Diamond Rio 600 was my favorite MP3 player prior to getting the 1st gen iPod. It also used the SoundJam software that Apple purchased and reengineered for the initial version of iTunes. 
    edited May 28 StrangeDayslolliverbigpicsbaconstangpscooter63
  • Reply 18 of 54
    LatkoLatko Posts: 398member
    Kudo’s to Joni for further pushing the envelope in terms of a contemporary design language
    (12 years ago)
    edited May 28 elijahg
  • Reply 19 of 54
    The A8 CPU was one year old when the 6th generation iPod Touch was released. The new 7th generation iPod Touch slipped an entire year with its 2.5 year old A10 CPU. On top of that, Apple is charging $200 for the 256 GB upgrade. A much faster 256 GB M.2 sells for $40. The Hubris is strong with this one. Apple asked "we have to update the iPod Touch so it can run iOS 13, what is the least we can do?" The 7th generation is the answer to that question.
    edited May 28 canukstormdavgregblurpbleepbloopchemengin1elijahgmike54
  • Reply 20 of 54
    canukstorm said: What you paid for, for a shitty MP3 player many years ago is irrelevant. 
    It's relevant to people claiming that prices are too high versus the technology you're getting. He's not even adjusting that price for inflation. I paid almost $400 on Amazon for the Diamond Rio 600 back in 2000. Adjusted for inflation, that's around $590 in 2019 dollars. 
    StrangeDayslolliver
Sign In or Register to comment.