Hey, Apple, why no video camera for the iPod touch?
- 10 September, 2009 08:52
Wednesday's Apple Music Event may not have unveiled any astounding or amazing products. But if you're a fan of the iPod touch, as I am, you may have felt a bit miffed that Apple's multi-talented media player didn't get a video camera.
That's right: The iPod nano got a video cam, but the iPod touch didn't. If you ask me, the touch, with its built-in Wi-Fi, gaming capabilities, and larger display, would be a natural for a vid cam. And since the iPhone 3GS, the touch's mobile phone sibling, already has a camera, adding said feature to the touch wouldn't exactly be a feat of complex engineering.
Why the Snub?
On the surface, it appears as if Apple is striving to draw a clearer distinction between the 16GB iPod nano ($US179, video camera), 8GB iPod touch ($US199, no camera), and the 8GB iPhone 3GS ($US199 with 2-year AT&T contract, video camera, phone).
But if true, does this distinction truly benefit Apple? NPD Group analyst Ross Rubin says it's "strange" that Apple would add a video camera to the nano, but not to the touch. But unlike me, he doesn't see the camera-less touch as an attempt by Apple to "avoid more direct competition with the iPhone."
"Clearly Apple added Open GL capabilities to make the iPod touch a more robust platform," says Rubin. The 32GB and 64GB iPod touch models are now 50-percent faster, according to Apple, and feature support for the Open GL|ES 2.0 graphics API.
Given these capabilities, a camera-equipped touch would have benefitted Apple, particularly as it gears up to compete with inexpensive consumer camcorders like Pure Digital's Flip UltraHD. "The addition of a camera, combined with Wi-Fi would have given Apple more of an advantage in terms of uploading video versus, say, the Flip," Rubin says.
Another explanation for a video-cam equipped nano is that it gives Apple's venerable MP3 player a shot in the arm. A recent study by stock market day trader Andy Zaky shows that iPod sales revenues are falling as consumers upgrade to smartphones and more sophisticated media players (like the iPod touch) -- devices that do a lot more than play tracks. It's likely that a nano that also shoots video would appeal to value-focused shoppers as the holiday season approaches.
Says Rubin: "The Nano has been a very strong seller during the holidays. It's small and portable. Offering the camera on it is more of a way to differentiate it from other media playback devices that are competing in the midrange of the market."
Still, the iPod touch deserves a camera. Perhaps next year?