Why No Fries with the iPod touch?

by Chris Howard Sep 12, 2007

After nine months of anticipation, Apple finally released an iPod based on the iPhone form factor and interface. But for reasons unknown, Apple chose to leave off one or two essential applications, and according to the latest rumor, has neutered others.

You get the feeling that if Apple bought McDonald’s they would cut the fries from the combo meals. I hope you didn’t want fries with your new iPod touch!

The iPod touch is a lovely device, and I have to out myself as being wrong. I was among those who said Apple wouldn’t release a device like it within 12 months of the iPhone.

Hindsight is a great thing, and now I can see why Apple might have done so. Certainly there’s a big market for it, but the two devices could cannibalize each other. Which, at the end of the day, matters not to Apple, as they still get a sale. And Steve said as much in a recent interview with USA Today.

However, in markets still waiting for the iPhone—such as Europe and Asia—it will be interesting to see how the iPod touch sells. Personally, I’m having a dilemma over whether to get an iPod touch or wait for the iPhone. And a young woman I spoke to at an electronics retailer said she’d be waiting.

Actually, the more more I find out about the touch, the more I lose interest in it.

I saw one reader comment on a web forum last week that the iPod touch is a PDA. I suspect, though, he’s in for a big disappointment. Apple isn’t pushing it that way, so it’s hard to know if it really is. In fact, Apple’s demo video didn’t even mention iCal or Address Book, two key apps on a PDA. And rumors have it there’ll be no ability to input calendar entries—which is upsetting a lot of people who pre-ordered specifically expecting that feature.

But the big thing missing—the fries if you will—is email. Its absence is the deciding factor in my not buying an iPod touch.

For a device that has internet access, the lack of an email client leaves one speechless. So what if you can do it online through Safari? An offline reader is essential in a portable, internet-connected device. Plus, using a browser, you have to manually check your email. Also, if you have multiple email accounts, using a browser really starts getting cumbersome.

In my part of the world, wireless hotspots are rare, so I wouldn’t be able to use the browser or email much anyway. But if hotspots were available, then I’d be eternally frustrated at having an internet device without email.

Say that again a couple of times: “an internet device without email.” Have you ever heard of anything stupider? A car without seats? A combo meal without fries? A computer without a mouse? A house without a bathroom? An internet device without email?

Possibly, someone will port the iPhone’s email client to the iPod touch, and hopefully that will force Apple to include it.

Unfortunately, this adds to the dilemma. Do I wait for the touch to get an email client? Or just get an iPod classic? And do I then forget about the iPhone?

But if the rumor of the inability to input to the calendar and address book proves true, the decision is easy. No touch. Without those PDA abilities, the difference between a touch and an iPod classic narrows too much to justify the touch.

The interesting thing is, the lack of PDA type functions, such as calendar entry and email, stops me buying an iPod touch in preference to an iPod classic. But the absence of those from the touch wouldn’t influence my decision to buy an iPhone.

I’d buy an iPhone because it’s a phone with iPod features. But I would have bought a touch if it was an iPod with email and PDA features.

With the touch having no compelling features, and already owning an iPod, albeit sans video, I expect I’ll just buy nothing.

Steve was happy to appease the angry mob over the price cut; hopefully he’ll appease the rowdy rabble over the lack of email and calendar entry.

Come on, Steve, mate, give us the fries with that iPod touch.

Comments

  • The one thing Apple has stretched most is customer expectations from the rumour wheel.

    Benji had this to say on Sep 16, 2007 Posts: 927
  • And throw in the complaints about the classic. -Chris

    The Classic is truly a <u>classic</u> in the sense that it beautifully improved upon the 5.5G Video.

    The form factor is slimmer and a tad lighter even with the 160GB HDD. I mentioned it has same feel as holding a Touch. Both have semi-parabolic edge with a flat surface. Whereas the iPhone’s has rounded edge.

    The menu system is new - with the addition of Coverflow. The animation is a bit herky-jerky at times (but no noteable breaks). The latencies from menu level to another have obvious slowness. I timed from less than 1 to several seconds from click to complete render. The new menu system consists of both a list + animated sequences on the right half of the screen.

    I think some of these are solvable thru sw updates enough to be acceptable and usable. We should not expect the hw to support fluid animations like a Touch or iPhone. The OS is not even OSX Darwin at this juncture.

    Chris, I think the Classic will be perfect for us while we wait for the iPhone 3G. wink

    Robomac had this to say on Sep 16, 2007 Posts: 846
  • “Stupider” is an improper comparative form. Preferred usage is “more stupider”.

    mcmillion had this to say on Sep 16, 2007 Posts: 1
  • Hasn’t there been a firmware update to the classic that improved coverflow performance? Or did I dream that.

    Benji had this to say on Sep 16, 2007 Posts: 927
  • Ben, if there was a fw update, wouldn’t you think the Ó Boutique would have them first?

    @McM$, do you have anything constructive to add?

    Robomac had this to say on Sep 16, 2007 Posts: 846
  • McM: I think you meant to say, “more stupid” - unless of course you were being tongue-in-cheek, which I suspect you were. smile

    Benji: Heheh, yes, the rumor mill has a lot to answer for. Altho… I’m gunna start a rumor the iPod Oz is coming next MWSF. smile And I think you dreamed the update.

    Robo: I think I’ll save my hard earned wait til MWSF 08 and see if the rumored iPod Oz eventuates. smile

    Chris Howard had this to say on Sep 16, 2007 Posts: 1209
  • For a good look (subjectively, of course) here is a snap of both the Classic & iPhone side-by-side showing their best LCD vividness.
    ipod-classic-review-1.jpg
    And thickness…
    ipod-classic-review-2.jpg

    courtesy:AppleInsider.

    Notice the difference in the edge curvature?

    Robomac had this to say on Sep 16, 2007 Posts: 846
  • iPod Oz is coming next MWSF.

    That gives me four months to save up for a nice vacation over Quensland. Gotta go reef snorklin’. wink

    Later, mate!

    Robomac had this to say on Sep 16, 2007 Posts: 846
  • Ben, if there was a fw update, wouldn’t you think the Ó Boutique would have them first?
    The Regent Street store is surprisingly slow with that sort of thing.

    Why is the Eye of Mordor shining out of that iPhone?

    Benji had this to say on Sep 16, 2007 Posts: 927
  • Thanks for those pics, Robo. Certainly quash the argument a HDD iTouch (dang, you finally got me saying it too!) would be too thick.

    Benji: Don’t know if it was dream or premonition or you just heard first, but I see you were right about that classic update.

    Chris Howard had this to say on Sep 17, 2007 Posts: 1209
  • And for “vividness” side-by-side test, here’s a pic from Ars:
    35-upright.jpg ,

    Notice the difference of rendered blacks? On the Touch (left) blacks = grays. The iPhone (right) renders blacks more accurately. The iPhone is a tad brighter and much sharper to boot!

    Well, you might say: “So what if the Touch is a bit more dull than an iPhone. At least, won’t get to plunk $1,416 ($59/mo) over 2 years”.

    That’s all swell. But reading this thread proves that <u>the Touch is not exactly an iPhone without the phone.</u> There are lots of non-features that might sway your decision to go Classic or iPhone.

    Perhaps, Apple intended the iTouch for first-time iPod buyers since this thing confuses the heck out of upgraders, like the most of us.

    Robomac had this to say on Sep 17, 2007 Posts: 846
  • Here’s an LCD engineer have to say re: Touch LCD’s black-level issue (Apple Discussions)

    “I’m an engineer with experience in the LCD industry and after seeing enough photos of the Ipod Touch I feel that I can make a pretty accurate assessment of the “black level” situation. It appears to me that it’s a problem with the anti-reflective coating. The good news is this is most likely a temporary situation due to quality control issues.

    (Added explanation: The AR coating is essentially a clear layer that prevents light from reflecting off of that surface. What’s happening here is the upper glass layer is reflecting light from the LCD screen back down onto the said screen. Without an AR coating you get exactly what you see - shimmering blacks. The problem isn’t noticeable with vibrant colors on screen. Rotating the screen will change the way this light is reflected to your eyes and may minimize the problem, but since the LCD was engineered to give best color output when looking straight on, you’re left with a losing battle.)

    Apple surely rushed the factory on getting these out (Steve was likely already upset enough that they weren’t ready for the announcement along with the other units) and the factory, under undoubtedly ridiculous amounts of pressure, started to skimp on this very expensive - and very important - part of the process. Additionally, AR coating issues would also explain why you see “slight changes” from one unit to the next.

    It’s the last thing anyone wants to hear, but the best thing to do is wait 2 weeks or even a month for the complaints to filter through Apple HQ into the factory where changes will certainly be made.

    Good luck all - and to those who got good units congrats!”

    @drvelocity

    So, this situation is, perhaps, temporary and will need new hw revision(s) to fix.

    Hmmm…can an Apple recall in the offing? How ‘bout pending class-action lawsuits?

    Robomac had this to say on Sep 17, 2007 Posts: 846
  • the factory, under undoubtedly ridiculous amounts of pressure, started to skimp on this very expensive - and very important - part of the process.

    Oops! My cynic alarm’s gone off! Why assume it’s the factory? I would immediately ask if it was actually Apple who skimped on this “very expensive” process.

    Be a clever way to maximize margins and then in the 2G, they come out and say “we’ve fixed that brightness problem”, and everyone thinks they’re wonderful.

    How many times have I heard Steve tout a line about “and the screen on this new model is so much brighter and sharper…”?

    Ye. Full scale cynic alarm.

    Chris Howard had this to say on Sep 17, 2007 Posts: 1209
  • Oops! My cynic alarm’s gone off! Why assume it’s the factory? I would immediately ask if it was actually Apple who skimped on this “very expensive” process.

    Take it with a grain of salt, absolutely. Yet, he’s got a point either way we see it.

    Also, note that he is reporting from Taiwan and we know Taiwanese engineers are very credible sources of Apple rumours (Straits Times?).

    If I were also in a cynical mood, why was the availability of the Touch not on the same day as the The Beat Goes On event when the Great Zen can exert that kind of pressure on Foxconn?

    Robomac had this to say on Sep 17, 2007 Posts: 846
  • Ars Technica have already picked-up what I have been reporting here.

    Ars’ Infinite Loop column states, “As our own iPod touch review found, some of the shipping units suffer from questionable color replication, particularly with blacks.”

    The column even uses same Drvelocity input at Apple Discussions (link above).

    Robomac had this to say on Sep 17, 2007 Posts: 846
  • Page 8 of 9 pages « First  <  6 7 8 9 >
You need log in, or register, in order to comment