[grawk]

You mean other than the lack of a phone on the touch?

 

[Albinoni]

Quote:

Originally Posted by grawk /img/forum/go_quote.gif I find the amp in my ipods and iphone to be acceptable for on the go use. Powers my portable phones just great. If you're one of the rare people who needs more, you buy a portable amp, and you're done. You'll never find a consumer product aimed at audiophiles. Apple sells more ipods in a week than there are members of headfi.

I have found Ipods to have a weak and pathetic amp, I have used and tried an Ipod a while back (Ipod Classic 80GB) and to say the least the amps in these are a joke, seriously, sorry I am not having a go here but the amp in my Creative Zens and Cowon iAudio 6 just kill it.

Apple really need to pick up its game and instead of Steve Jobs jumping up and down stage on how wonderful his products are, try and build proper and truly sounding Hi Fi MP3 players.

 

[grawk]

maybe you didn't have a good match with your headphones?

 

[77Pat]

I could see use for a camera on the ipod touch. The camera on my cellphone is only vga and I do not have a data package, so I would think the ipod touch will at least be a little better.

With the touch, I would be able to take quick snapshots and upload them to facebook/twitter/wherever else when I have a wifi connection. For those types of photos you do not need the best quality, online guides say all you really need is a 3 megapixel camera. You don't really need higher unless you are going to be printing the pictures, enlarging them, or are very strict on image quality.

 

[bixby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro /img/forum/go_quote.gif New iPod nano & iPod touch on September 9: Cameras! — DisplayBlog I thought this was a joke. When every man, woman and child in the world carries a cellphone that already has a camera, why would you put a camera on an Ipod? Still completely missing the boat on custom EQ and or stronger amplification. So what if the market for it isn't huge. Make fewer of them and charge $300 instead of $200. Big deal. Perhaps we will start seeing phone and texting capabilities on our dedicated cameras. Wouldn't THAT be a treat!

Who cares! Do you think this post will influence Apple?

Redcarmoose has it right

"The MP3 players like this one are great for kids. The kids do not care about audio features, it just has to look cool on the outside and have a cool camera so they can film each other jumping their bikes off houses."

Apple's target market is not us..............

 

[fhuang]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dallan /img/forum/go_quote.gif The camera will probably be about as good as the 128 mp3s they sell out of the itunes store-worthless......and will service the same crowd that listens to 128mp3s.

actually i'm fine with that because i don't know how to take pictures. my girlfriend laughed at me for the pictures i took(she was a professional though).


still, i don't need a camera, my cellphone has one. i have a camera too. i actually ok with the ipods(photo and classic) i got. the amp itself is bad(photo) and ok(classic) but i really don't mind taking an external amp even when using iems.

 

[Real Man of Genius]

This way you can take pictures of your cellphone without needing a mirror.

 

[TedwardRoberts]

The general population loves drinking the apple koolaid, so of course they'll sell a zillion of these.

I was hoping for some cool new ipod touch features to compete with the zune HD... oh well.

 

[jwong]

Wow, no improvements at all on the Touch unless you go up to the 32gb/64gb models, and even then it's only a speed increase. The Zune HD looks pretty good to me right now.

 

[grawk]

You want to squirt with your ipod?

I'm getting 2 of the ipod touches soon.

 

[Jubei]

But at least the 160G iPod Classic is back in production - want a 250G one though.

 

[mark2410]

how about a removable battery

 

[grawk]

I agree with the non-removeable battery. Makes them more reliable. You can get lipoly external batteries if you're gonna be away from a wall that long.