
I don’t expect Apple to deliver on rumours. After all, most rumours are crap, even John Gruber’s iPod touch camera prediction. But that doesn’t stop me from asking questions: Why the hell there is no camera on the iPod touch?
• No Space: The iPod touch is much thinner than the iPhone. There is not a lot of empty space in there, so maybe this is a technical decision. Perhaps Apple couldn’t find a part that could fit in the current case, and they didn’t want to alter the touch’s physical dimensions. But then again, if the minuscule iPod nano can get a camera, why not the touch? Perhaps it’s because the nano got a pretty weak camera.
• Features Mix: Apple could possibly have fit the iPod nano camera in the iPod touch, and kept the price. After all, it’s a super-tiny, ultra-cheap VGA camera. But maybe that acronym the key: It’s VGA. Low resolution. The nano doesn’t even do still photography because it will look like crap—video is more forgiving. People buying the iPod touch would be expecting a lot more. I know I would. So while there’s the possibility of a camera in the iPod touch, perhaps is not the camera Apple thinks would be right for it—namely, the iPhone’s camera.
• Technical Difficulties: This was one of the last-minute rumours: Apple had technical difficulties during manufacturing, so the rumour said the iPod touch—with camera—was going to be delayed. If that was the case, Apple would have just announced the iPod touch with camera, and get it to the stores later. However, the iPod touch without camera is here, available immediately, which means that they have been churning them out the factory for a long long time. It doesn’t seem like a last minute change of plans to me.
• Pricing Issues: Apple wanted to have a $US199 iPod touch, and keep the prices of the bigger units while increasing capacity. This sounds more reasonable than the technical excuses. The 8GB version, however, is just the old one, which is being manufactured like always to get that “low” price. No camera could be added to it, unless Apple wanted to sacrifice on the price front. Only the 32 and 64GB versions have internal hardware modifications. But would Apple have an iPod touch with camera and one without? Seems unlikely for a company obsessed with uniformity and streamlining.
• Market Segmenting: Here things get more interesting. Apple said they wanted to compete with the Flip, which is a sub-$150 device. It’s almost impossible to get the iPod touch to that price level while keeping the large touchscreen, the wireless capabilities, and the strong processing guts that the iPhone OS needs. Not right at these prices—at least, not without affecting their profit margins negatively. The iPod nano, however, can fit the Flip competition role nicely. This is a probable explanation.
• iPhone Cannibalisation: The other explanation is cannibalisation. This is a good one too. Add a camera to the iPod touch and, boom, the iPhone loses yet another advantage over its lesser brother. So maybe putting the iPhone’s camera into the iPod touch is feasible. Apple may just be protecting the market for the iPhone.
• Feature Evolution: This, to me, is the most reasonable explanation. Apple is getting oh-so-lazy. Or, better said, greedy. They are the number one player in every single category. They own the market. And they know the competition is just catching on. So instead of releasing an iPhone that is way better than the previous model, they release the modest upgrade of the iPhone 3GS. And instead of releasing an iPod touch with a nice camera, they just slap some new software, slightly updated guts and more memory.
That’s what you get when a company owns an empire, and the other tiny people are trying to catch up with an already phenomenal device. The company gets slow and complacent, and does the minimum to keep its products ahead.
So no, I don’t expect Apple to deliver on rumours. But it pisses me off that they don’t do their best every single time. That they get boring and lazy. And yes, perhaps it’s not in their best economic interest to release insanely great products in every single update, but the lack of camera on the iPod touch is sure going to be a letdown for a huge number of people.
Some people won’t agree. Some would even go onto their soap boxes, grab Apple’s cock with their tiny little hands, and suck greedily once again, saying that “Apple is firing on all cylinders.” Maybe they are. It’s just that they left the Porsche GT2 at home, and they are now driving a Mini.
Jonathan Lin
September 10, 2009 at 1:53 PM
Do u need a camera on ur ipod touch if u already have on on ur mobile phone. Since most people have a mobile phone already with higher mega pixel then the iphone i think a camera on an ipod touch is a little pointless.
Report Permalinkpsycoblaster
September 10, 2009 at 5:49 PM
That’s not the point. More than half of the people waiting for this new Ipod Touch thought that this new player will have a camera. Even though people knew it as a rumor, many people thought it was true. However, being revealed that there are no camera and that there are only technical upgrades, that kills both the people who already has an Ipod touch 2G and the people who were waiting for the new model. The new features that they have believed doesn’t even exist, and the 2G’s price cut was pretty heavy.
Report PermalinkIt’s almost apple’s suicide move.
Merc
September 15, 2009 at 1:01 AM
The fact that they have gone and released an updated iPod Touch as well is a kick in the ass to people who own them already.
I mean, It cost me a fortune for my 32GB, and now the 64GB can work out cheaper. Plus, it includes radio capability and the 3.1 Update. While we have to pay more for the 3.0, then add the 3.1 on top of it.
Only 1% of Touch owners have bothered to pay for the 3.0 anyway, I’m not one of them.
Get it right, Apple.
Report Permalink