Slashdot Mirror


Apple Releases Basic iPod Touch, Possibly Foreshadowing iPhone Strategy

redletterdave writes "While the new 16 GB iPod Touch released Thursday features the same 4-inch Retina display and dual-core A5 processor as its other variants, the newest, cheapest iPod Touch lacks a rear camera and comes in just two colors black and silver. Apple is reportedly pursuing a similar strategy with the iPhone, as reports from the past several months have pointed to development of a 'low-cost iPhone' with basic features to be sold at a lower price point."

39 of 228 comments (clear)

  1. Obnoxiously... by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The 4th generation 8 GB iPod Touch was also $229, but did have both cameras. They weren't as high-quality as their iPhone counterparts, but still.

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    1. Re:Obnoxiously... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      So, compared to a 4th gen, a 5th gen has:
      - twice the storage
      - bigger, much higher quality screen in a physical package only 11% longer
      - 87% the weight
      - much faster cpu
      - twice the ram

      The only thing you lost was a shitty camera that was less than 1MP. All this for the same price. Go ahead and load up an old 4th gen with recordings of yourself playing the worlds tiniest violin.

    2. Re:Obnoxiously... by Charliemopps · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And you can buy just about any other MP3 player on the market with the same features for under $50... AND you're not forced to use apple iTunes, the worst piece of software I've ever had the misfortune to use. It boggles the mind how Apples customer continue to pay these kinds of prices for such inferior products.

      Full disclosure: I hate Apple

    3. Re:Obnoxiously... by danbob999 · · Score: 2

      and is it easy to get music (and podcasts, and as I said, apps) onto the device and smart playlists, etc?

      Almost every non-Apple music player ever made supports "drag and drop" music copying from your PC, without any crappy software required.

    4. Re:Obnoxiously... by TangoMargarine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Rockbox (http://www.rockbox.org/) on a Sansa Fuze, day after Thanksgiving sale for $49. Expandable memory via microSD card slot; also picks up radio, has microphone, plays AAC, OGG, FLAC, etc., etc., etc. Comes with a number of games etc. Not ridiculously high resolution display, but I really don't see the point of that or random apps so hey. Oh, plus you can skin it. Can an iPod do that? No?

      Unfortunately this was a few years ago when they still made them with physical wheels. Now they're making them with capacitance thingies like iPods :P

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    5. Re:Obnoxiously... by danbob999 · · Score: 2

      Does it actually try to play it as music?

      I can't believe somebody is asking this on Slashdot. Non-music files are just ignored. But yes, you can use your MP3 player as a USB thumb drive.

    6. Re:Obnoxiously... by Pseudonym+Authority · · Score: 5, Funny

      What if you drag a thing that's not music to it? Does it actually try to play it as music?

      You got a good point there; an invalid file will cause a typical MP3 player to explode. Apple is the only company that makes a music device that doesn't kill the user when there is an error.

  2. Screens by Bogtha · · Score: 2

    This leaves only the iPhone 4 and 4S as devices Apple sell without the taller screen. If there's any hint at an upcoming product strategy, it would be that they might drop those models to streamline production.

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    1. Re:Screens by Amouth · · Score: 2

      Agreed, if anything this sounds to me more like streamlining the supply chain and manufacturing by removing component variance. Using the same part a million times is significantly cheaper than using one part for 800k and another for 200k even if the single part used a million times is more expensive.

      I'd expect the same result across the board as they roll it out.

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
  3. Strange. by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Apple's iPod lineup keeps getting stranger year after year.

    First the strange design changes for the nano (went from being basically a better mini to a tiny squashed one, back to being tall, then adding a camera, then taking away the camera, and video playback adding a touchscreen and making it squashed, now making it look like a smaller iPod touch) and now the removal of one of the cameras on the touch for the same price-point as one -with- the cameras (smaller storage on the previous generation, but with flash becoming cheaper and cheaper every year that should be expected)

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:Strange. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I always thought of the nano as their test lab where they experiment with features and ideas.. Being one of their "cheaper" iPods guarantees that lots get sold and they can get a good idea of how people react to, utilize, and break these features before they go up the product line.

  4. Re:Start giving back some of that money, Apple. by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Except that Apple has historically never been one to sacrifice profit/(perceptions of) quality for marketshare.

    Aside from the iPod and the iPhone, Apple has never really been the most used. Certainly they have historically been in some niche applications (graphic design and publishing come to mind) but they've never been the "mainstream" computer brand. They've managed to always keep a solid enough marketshare to make sure that they get supported, but aside from the iPhone and iPod, they've historically never been number one, nor seemed to have any interest in total marketshare domination.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  5. Check your facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    The new iPod does not come in two colors, it comes in one color: silver back + black face. Also, in addition to not having the camera it also omits the wrist strap attachment.

    1. Re:Check your facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      black face.

      Does it come pre-loaded with Al Jolson routines?

  6. Re:Start giving back some of that money, Apple. by larryjoe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Another way to look at this is that Apple has always historically pursued maximum profits and market share but adopted different strategies in light of the practicalities of specific markets. As an underdog in the PC market, quality was a differentiator to attract whatever market share was possible, realizing that being a dominant volume seller was not possible. As the dominant vendor in the smartphone space but with eroding market share, Apple is decreasing quality and cost to maintain market share and profit (although not margins). I think this is the more accurate portrayal of Apple, since I doubt they would be willing to blindly sacrifice profit in the name of quality or aesthetics.

  7. Re:Start giving back some of that money, Apple. by Anubis+IV · · Score: 5, Informative

    Start giving back some of that money, Apple.

    I know it didn't get reported on Slashdot, but still, you're kidding, right? I mean, it was big news and only happened a few weeks ago.

    Apple is currently engaging in the largest single share repurchase program in history , which will put $60B USD into their investors' pockets by the end of 2015. And that's on top of the $11B/year they're paying out in dividends already.

    All told, they're giving back $100B by the end of 2015, which is over 2/3 of what they have in the bank right now. So, either you were unaware of that, or you think that their doing so is not a big enough step, in which case I have to ask: what would be sufficient?

    As for the gravy train being over, by what metric? Their sales certainly aren't growing at the rate that Android's are, but by any measure, they are still massively successful. Their rate of sale has continued to grow incredibly fast, and their profits in PCs and mobile devices represent either a plurality or majority in each of those markets.

  8. Re:What I want in a portable music player by timmyf2371 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Meeting all your requirements seems to be impossible (I googled) and I don't think the situation will change in the future.

    If you can make compromises, it seems that the iPod Classic 160GB plays ALAC files and comes in at £199. Not sure what the dollar price is or whether ALAC is a suitable replacement for FLAC (I'm happy enough with 320kbps Spotify tunes so hardly the right person to ask).

    However, the main problem is that we are at the point where the majority want converged devices and this means that, for most people, their phone doubles as a music player, a camera, and everything else.

    The market for standalone music players definitely still exists, but don't expect to see much innovation there. In general, the market for these devices is one that wants to load up their MP3/AAC collection and take it with them while out exercising. People with your needs are a minority and in a saturated market, there is little point in companies developing such a device for marginal profit gains.

    --

    Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
  9. Re:"Just" $229 for the 16GB version? Are you kiddi by timmyf2371 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But if you take away all those things - especially the touch screen - it is no longer an iPod touch and simply becomes a bigger iPod Nano. And I would make the argument that if you do remove all those features, you don't need such a big display so you could even make it the same size as the iPod Nano.

    Realistically, in 2013, would you not consider a touch screen as a basic feature? It might have been advanced 6-7 years ago but these days you can pick up cheap Android devices for under £50 which all have touch screens.

    WiFi and Bluetooth connectivity these days seem to come as part of the SoC which powers these devices. Same with GPS. I think it would actually turn out more expensive to maintain a separate line producing separate chips - particularly as the incremental cost of WiFi & Bluetooth isn't much.

    You probably don't need Apple to convince you to buy one of their iProducts. They aren't going to give you drag & drop nor remove the iTunes requirement. I love my iPhone but I really hate iTunes so much that I subscribe to Spotify instead and only use that for music these days.

    If you're happy enough with your Zen, why not look for its natural successor instead? You'll probably appreciate it much more than switching to Apple.

    --

    Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
  10. Re:Start giving back some of that money, Apple. by mosb1000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The US gov't wants to tax this money a second time, at the full tax rate, as if the money had never been taxed before, as if it had been made in the US.

    The IRC actually allows you to deduct foreign taxes from the taxes you owe. The thing is, corporate taxes are much lower in other parts of the world, so what you said is practically true even though it's not actually true at all.

  11. Re:Get rid of the front camera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    tbh, on an iPod the front camera is the one that gets used most. Up until the 5th gen, iPod rear cameras were far inferior to their iPhone siblings (0.92 megapixels) and basically worthless. Of all my friends and family that have iPods/iPads, none of them use the rear camera for anything (excluding rugrats taking pictures accidentally), but almost all use facetime chat heavily.

  12. Re:What I want in a portable music player by Nyder · · Score: 2

    Meeting all your requirements seems to be impossible (I googled) and I don't think the situation will change in the future.

    If you can make compromises, it seems that the iPod Classic 160GB plays ALAC files and comes in at £199. Not sure what the dollar price is or whether ALAC is a suitable replacement for FLAC (I'm happy enough with 320kbps Spotify tunes so hardly the right person to ask).

    However, the main problem is that we are at the point where the majority want converged devices and this means that, for most people, their phone doubles as a music player, a camera, and everything else.

    The market for standalone music players definitely still exists, but don't expect to see much innovation there. In general, the market for these devices is one that wants to load up their MP3/AAC collection and take it with them while out exercising. People with your needs are a minority and in a saturated market, there is little point in companies developing such a device for marginal profit gains.

    I have an Ipod Classic, I convert my 16bit/44khz flac to apple's lossless format and listen to the music that way. Love it! I'd just like the higher bit & sample rate for my vinyl rips. Ya, i'm probably in the minority, but I do think they could add the 24bit/96khz easier then they can add a camera to the music players.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  13. Re:Start giving back some of that money, Apple. by ozmanjusri · · Score: 4, Informative

    no matter what they do with their money they will keep losing market share if they keep making stupid decisions.

    Even if they make good decisions, they'll still lose market share. Their problem isn't that they're getting stupid, it's that everyone else is getting smart.

    Phones like the HTC One are beautifully made and elegantly designed. Jelly Bean is slick, comfortable and easy to use. Other manufacturers are leapfrogging a long way past Apple's current standards, and doing it at a lower cost. Look at Lenovo's latest:

    The [Lenovo K900] sports a 5.5-inch display with a 1080 x 1920p resolution with a pixel density of 400ppi. Lenovo K900 is powered by the latest Intel Atom Clover Trail+ processor clocked at 2 GHz, alongside 2 GB of RAM. Furthermore, the device comes with a 13 megapixel Sony Exmor BSI rear camera and a 2 megapixel front-facing shooter.

    http://www.gsmarena.com/lenovo_k900_now_available_in_china_priced_at_536-news-6062.php

    --
    "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  14. About "market share" by TimHunter · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Can we please stop pretending that "market share" means "winning?" http://techpinions.com/androids-market-share-is-literally-a-joke/16709

    1. Re:About "market share" by danbob999 · · Score: 2

      For the company itself or the shareholders, you are right, market share doesn't mean winning.
      However, from a custommer point of view, market share means winning, because it means that the platform is the most widely adopted and will gain support.
      Chances are that your company will buy Windows PCs because this platform is winning the PC war. Even if Apple made more money on OS X than Microsoft on Windows, that wouldn't change that.

    2. Re:About "market share" by mtb_ogre · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Chances are that your company will buy Windows PCs because this platform is winning the PC war. "

      Traditional PC sales have dropped in real terms for 9 consecutive quarters and the most recent quarter was the deepest yet. The iMac has grown market share and actual units shipped over that same time period. Apple introduced the iPad shipped 120 million units at an average selling price of just a touch over the ASP of Windows PCs. Apple's profits on just the Mac and iPad exceed the profits of all Windows PC makers combined (Though I'm not sure Microsoft themselves).

      What exactly is your definition of "winning the PC war"?

    3. Re:About "market share" by mtb_ogre · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Walk into any office of any reasonably sized company. Count the number of Macs. Now count the number of PCs. In my company for example the only Macs I see are when people bring their own.

      No doubt. But there are more Macs as a percentage this year than there were last year, iPads have replaced increasing numbers of PCs this year. When you lose ground every year for 2-3 years you aren't winning. Computers installed in people's offices are little comfort to Dell and HP as they try and figure out how to explain to their shareholders exactly why their sales are into double digit declines and share value yet again.

      .. a shift in consumer preferences could completely trash Apple's bottom line.

      The oft repeated mantra which has been proved wrong for every year over the past 10+ years.

  15. Re:Start giving back some of that money, Apple. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    "They paid taxes in the nations they made the money in. "

    No.

    Apple may have "deliberately or accidentally" misled Australians about how it sets prices here and should "correct the record or provide further detail", a Labor backbencher has demanded.

    Backbencher Ed Husic, who has taken a leading role in an Australian parliamentary committee into IT pricing, said shock revelations from a US Senate committee raised concerns "the Australian inquiry has been misled, either deliberately or accidentally".

    "I'd call on Apple Australia to either correct the record or provide further detail as to the way it actually prices its products for Australian consumers," Husic told the House of Representatives.

    Husic said people may have "raised an eyebrow" at reports that Apple generated $6bn in revenue in Australia but "paid only $40m in tax – apparently because it racked up $5.5bn in costs", but "their eyes would've popped out" at the US revelations Apple had set up an offshore subsidiary that earned $30bn income but had apparently paid no tax to any government for five years.

    And the two committee investigations were related, because Apple's complicated international structure has an impact on the prices paid for Apple products for Australians.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/28/australian-companies-forced-disclose-tax

    Note that the "$5.5bn in costs" was mostly fees paid by the Australian branch to the offshore subsidiary. Basically a way to inflate prices and pump money out of the region.

  16. This is proof that.. by houbou · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Samsung and the other lower end competitors are hurting Apple. The only reason Apple would be selling dumb down versions of their products is that the competition products are hurting their sales to a point where it is better off to have cheaper and less costly products and get that money than see it being spend elsewhere.

    1. Re:This is proof that.. by DigiShaman · · Score: 2

      That, and the fact they want more users purchasing iTunes content even if that means providing a cheaper "gateway drug" platform.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:This is proof that.. by 0ld_d0g · · Score: 2

      Maybe, but I think its the other way around. Apple does not currently have any problems making less money, as long as they make a high profit. Android phone makers however are on razor-thin margins and only Samsung is making any real money from selling Android Phones. That is not a good sign IMO. Maybe HTC can do a turnaround this year though. The HTC One looks pretty cool. http://www.mobilevillage.com/samsung-android-smartphone-profits-q1-2013/

  17. Re:"Just" $229 for the 16GB version? Are you kiddi by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 2

    I had one of those Zen X-FIs, too. They rocked. They *stored, transferred, and played back music files* quite nicely.

    In other words, they acted the way a reasonable media player ought. My sole gripe was that they didn't play all media files and there was no way to add support for those that were lacking.

    Smartphone takes care of that now, though. VLC works fine on all 3 of my Android devices, and I've yet to find a format it doesn't play, and thus I've no need for any other media player software on any of the platforms I use (Android, Linux, and occasionally Windows) or, any longer, for dedicated hardware, for that matter.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  18. Re:"Just" $229 for the 16GB version? Are you kiddi by danbob999 · · Score: 2

    You are joking right? $49 for a MP3 player without display, and only 2GB storage?

  19. Re:Hmmm by foniksonik · · Score: 2

    There are millions of new customers born every year. Every year a generation turns 8 or 12 or 15 and their parents decide to buy or are cajoled into buying personal electronics for them.

    It's an ever growing market for at least another 30 years.

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  20. Re:"Just" $229 for the 16GB version? Are you kiddi by foniksonik · · Score: 2

    People don't buy an iPod touch to play music. They buy them to play games. It's what you get for your 10 yr old niece/nephew/son/daughter. My 2 yr old has a 2nd gen iPhone w/o a cell card, basically an iPod touch. My 4 and 6 year olds have 3rd gen iPhones the same.

    It's been a great investment so far.

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  21. 30 Billion no tax in Ireland. by tuppe666 · · Score: 3, Informative

    It is a false urban legend that Apple is paying no taxes.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/video/2013/may/29/apples-dirty-little-tax-secret-video Here is a great informative video from where they unusually, actually go to Cork Ireland.

    They actually use a Tax loophole that allows them not to pay tax anywhere in the world. Its brilliant, what Apple do is not use a low tax island...they make the island disappear entirely. It woks because the US is concerned with where a company is Incorporated...where the Irish look where a Company is controlled...so Apple tell the US that they are Incorporated in Ireland...and tell the Irish they are controlled in the US, So Pay literally (proper use of word) NOTHING :)

    So if by Urban Myth...you actually mean Fact you would have been right. The fact that you were modded informative shows a frightening trend.

  22. Re:Start giving back some of that money, Apple. by CodeBuster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Apple is currently engaging in the largest single share repurchase program in history [macrumors.com], which will put $60B USD into their investors' pockets by the end of 2015.

    Apple financed the repurchase program by selling 17 billion dollars worth of short, medium and long term bonds. It was widely thought that this method was chosen, rather than repatriating cash held overseas, to avoid depletion of onshore cash reserves while at the same time further delaying the payment of income taxes on profits held overseas. It's interesting question whether or not Apple would be able to pay the bond coupons using that cash held overseas without incurring a tax liability. I presume that they wouldn't be able to, but even if they had to pay the coupons out of current after tax income the fact that a huge amount of cash remains on the balance sheet, albeit overseas and subject to tax if ever repatriated, strengthens Apple's financial situation vis-a-vis financing the share repurchase program entirely with cash.

  23. Morans by Uberbah · · Score: 2

    Apple is reportedly pursuing a similar strategy with the iPhone, as reports from the past several months have pointed to development of a 'low-cost iPhone' with basic features to be sold at a lower price point."

    There already is a low-cost iPhone, and it's been out for years. It's called Last Year's iPhone, and it's $100 with contract. And the iPhone from two years ago is free with contract.

    It would be like the press jabbering at Samsung for a cheaper Galaxy phone, when you could get a newly built model two versions old for that cheaper price. Why reinvent the wheel...

  24. Re:crap article by real-modo · · Score: 2

    Mod this insightful. "The media are jonesing for some Apple news": that's the only story about Apple at the moment. Samzenpus needs to go on a media studies course. And a critical thinking course wouldn't hurt either.

  25. Re:crap article by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

    Crap content, crap summary, crap analysis. Jesus, is someone holding a gun to your head and FORCING you to post Apple stories? There's NO APPLE NEWS. Apple has gone quiet, as it does quite regularly, and the tech press is losing it's fucking mind.

    Blame the economy. Any Apple news brings in lots of ad revenue. No Apple news brings in little.

    Face it - there's no other company on earth that can bring in the crowds Apple can.

    Google? Beyond Android fanboys and a tiny amount of Android haters, most people go "meh".

    Microsoft? The Microsoft haters have subsided, and most people don't really care either way.

    Apple? Well let's see, every Apple article attracts Apple fanboys, Apple haters (who seem to always be a steady population ever since the company was founded), Android fanboys, Android/Google haters (small).

    An Apple story brings in loads of Apple fanboys, and the crowd of Apple haters (who either hate them for legitimate reasons, or irrationally hate them) who always seem to be a constant population. The population of Google haters or Microsoft haters is far lower and they don't seem to populate those articles at much.

    It's the eyeballs people. Apple stories tend to attract the most because everyone descends down on them. Or, if you wanted to troll the internet, just write an Apple (non-)story.