Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, iPod Family
BusinessWeek is lukewarm on iPod Touch
BusinessWeek's Cliff Edwards recently reviewed the iPod Touch. While he gave it four-and-a-half out of five stars, he also made the same mistake that's plaguing many technophiles with regard to this device: Forgetting it's an iPod.It's an easy mistake to make. The iPod Touch is handicapped by its resemblance to the iPhone and the fact that it was released during the iPhone media blitz. As a result, people expect it to operate just like its twin. When it doesn't, they're disappointed. For example, Mr. Edwards writes:
"The Touch...lacks the iPhone's e-mail application, as well as its microphone, camera, and Bluetooth connection...widgets for gathering stock quotes, weather forecasts, and other information."
That's not an oversight, it's an example of Apple keeping the iPod true to its primary function as a digital music player. It's tempting - but unfair - to compare the iPod Touch to the iPhone. When the iPod Touch is compared point-by-point to its older siblings, it's clear what an advancement it is. Imagine the iPod Touch in a world without iPhones. People would be tripping over themselves to buy one.
"But the iPod Touch has Safari and YouTube," you say. I'd argue that Safari was only added as a concession to public Wi-Fi hotspots that require a login, and YouTube followed as a "Why not?" feature.
Later in the article, Mr. Edwards laments the Touch's lack of a "...slower cellular data connection" as a fall back for data transfer, as well as the fact that it can't download videos from the iTunes Wi-Fi Music Store. The latter isn't unique to the iPod Touch, and the former goes back to my original point: It's an iPod, not a phone.
Finally, he says that the Touch "...will appeal to a smaller audience than the Classic or Nano because of its limitations and inflated price tag."
That's true, the nano has typically been the best-selling model. While the Touch is the priciest iPod, it's hardly limited.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Adam said 12:18PM on 10-21-2007
I understand that it isn't an iPhone, its an iPod, but Apple has binaries that they could put on it with very little effort, such as Mail.app, so there isn't really any excuse not to put it on.
Reply
Zimmie said 12:23PM on 10-21-2007
Keep in mind that Apple's own marketing materials call iPhone the best iPod. I think it's a fair comparison to make because according to Apple, they're the same family of product.
Reply
Andy said 12:30PM on 10-21-2007
This post is rather fanboyish. Apple's lack of easily added features means it is being "true" to the iPod? Gimme a break.
I realize Apple needs to differentiate it from the iPhone. End of story.
Reply
Stace said 12:32PM on 10-21-2007
That's a pretty apologist stance there. If Youtube qualifies as a "why not?", surely the others do, too.
The iPod touch is crippled in its capabilities so as not to impede on the iPhone's sales, which come with a 2 year revenue stream guarantee. I think that's pretty clear.
Reply
yacoub said 12:33PM on 10-21-2007
If it was only ever intended to be an iPod it would have been priced more aggressively. Also, why wouldn't they give it the features it should have? It really DOESN'T take any LEGIT sales from the iPhone because - wait for it - IT'S NOT A PHONE.
The market for the iPod touch is the massive audience that fits into one of the following gigantic categories of potential owners who would not be potential iPhone owners but WOULD buy a touch:
*Already have a phone they are happy with
*Are in the midst of a phone contract they have no interest in breaking and paying large fees to do so just to get an iPhone
*Have no interest in AT&T as a carrier
*Have no interest in owning a phone with so much potential yet that is locked down like a police state
*Want a more durable or less expensive phone
Those are the audience for an iPod touch that has ALL OF THE APPS, etc, just not the camera/phone.
Also, if it was JUST an mp3 player it would not be worth anything even close to $300-400.
The reality is it's a multi-function device on which one can listen to music, watch movies, play games, chat, e-mail, surf the net, and add notes, new calendar items, and can view maps, weather, and stocks, and add third-party apps.
This is how it was intended before someone in Apple decided to go corporate-fascist and spend extra time and resources to REMOVE or INHIBIT a lot of this functionality from the factory-stock device.
No matter, it's all been returned now that 1.1.1 is cracked, and the freed touch is actually worth the $300-$400 asking price now that it offers a reasonable amount of functionality.
It's also laughable that they announced the SDK a week after 1.1.1 is cracked. They hope it will influence people not to free their devices. Fat chance. We'll take the free and unregulated apps and content our devices rightly deserve over some sort of authoritarian DRM approval and installation system they'll force on 3rd party devs and charge users to install via some proprietary iTunes process. Apple's lost its way and still can't figure out the right way back. Now they want to reinstate authoritarian control over the devices people have paid for and freed. Some people might be foolish enough to buy into that, but most won't - especially after enjoying their freed devices. Apple's though leadership really needs to get onboard and start working to earn that audience's interest and loyalty instead of trying to lock everything down and control us, control our devices, and control our pocketbooks.
Reply
Big John said 12:33PM on 10-21-2007
Adam, I don't think you understand that it's an iPod. You completely missed. Mail, Stocks and all those other functions are part of what defines the iPhone as a 'complete' solution for a mobile user -- phone, e-mail, SMS, internet, music, memo/task/calendar. Adding some of those functions to the iPod touch and you start to cannibalize sales of the iPhone by creating products that are too similar to each other.
Dave says it best: "That's not an oversight, it's an example of Apple keeping the iPod true to its primary function as a digital music player."
Best post about iPod touch complainers in a long time. Enjoy the device for what it is -- I know I am!
Also, Zimmie, they haven't called it "the best iPod yet" (good job leaving that 'yet' off in your post) since the iPod touch debuted. They're the same product if you're just comparing the iPod functionality.
Reply
Matt J said 12:35PM on 10-21-2007
True, it doesn't do as much as iPhone, but it's miles ahead in the Audio Player market. And don't forget, if we can trust Steve, it will be getting an SDK in February. AN SDK! This is a mass market device that will run third party applications. I'm sure Mr Edwards will be getting his widgets and mail application soon enough.
Reply
whollymammoth said 12:38PM on 10-21-2007
If the ipod touch had a "classic" sized hard drive or a nano sized price tag I might agree. The fact of the matter is that it cost nearly as much as an iphone but doesn't deliver equitably. It cost more than a classic and, as far as playing music goes, doesn't deliver there either. This device is NOT simply a media player. It IS an iphone without the phone... or it would be if it were not intentionally dumbed down.
Obviously it is an attempt to maximize profits via in product placement. It will probably work for a short period of time. The question is, will the lost respect for Apple translate into less profit in the long run? After all, we all know they could have delivered a better product at no additional cost to them but chose not to in order to squeak out a tiny bit more profit. Will it pay off?
Reply
yacoub said 12:37PM on 10-21-2007
Ok that sounded very aggressive and off-the-cuff, but that's the type of response an article will get when it's going to be so blatantly pro Apple being an authoritarian corporation. Here's a calmer rendition:
Honestly, the device is designed for more than listening to music or even also playing movies. Apple went out of their way to remove or inhibit functionality on it that really doesn't have anything to do with sapping iPhone sales, though that is the excuse folks like you have bought into.
That type of action on the part of Apple shows their true colors and real intention of controlling their customers so they can control their pocketbooks.
Reply
Henrik said 12:41PM on 10-21-2007
iPod schmiPod. Had they marketed it as a PDA with a built-in iPod, it would have scored better. But since we have a product with an identity problem rather than a fully-fledged PDA or a fully-fledged iPod or a fully-fledged phone, we get a little of each, but not enough.
It's something that Apple don't usually do, and this makes it a strange product.
I like the iPod Touch, but not because it's an iPod. It's because I hope I'll get to buy one when 3rd party apps are going to be available for it, so it can become the PDA it really needs to be.
Reply
Techslacker said 7:34PM on 10-21-2007
While it won't happen overnight, people should realize that Apple has now moved into a model that is more about milking the ipod for all it's worth. While they mention the ipod touch and the iphone are ipods, I think we're going to see in the next year or two where Apple talks about those two as "also playing music" and talking about them being more of a computing platform of some sort.
It's fair to criticize the ipod touch for not having certain features that the iphone does. I'd guess in another year or two many of those features mentioned will be on the ipod touch. Right now Apple needs a good way to attempt forcing more sales of the iphone.
Reply
K said 12:53PM on 10-21-2007
To the idiots who think Apple is somehow controlling and/or ripping you off, get over yourself. Apple is doing what every company does- product differentials. Do you complain because your base model Toyota doesn't have as much power as the Sports edition that cost a little more? Or it's missing the 6-stack CD player? Is your smooth peanut butter not as crunchy as the crunchy peanut butter? Seriously, get a grip, get over yourselves, and stop blaming Apple for being smart, profitable, and selling great products. Oh no! My iMac doesn't have as much RAM as the MacPro! How dare Apple try to control and limit me!
Reply
Michael Rose said 1:02PM on 10-21-2007
To my mind, the most important distinction between the iPhone and the iPod touch is very simple: I can buy an iPod touch for $399, not $399 + $600 or more /year.
I love the iPhone, but I already have a phone -- in fact, I have a very nice Blackberry that my company has seen fit to purchase for me AND PAY FOR. My incremental cost for getting an iPhone would be so high, including (as it must) cellphone service that I don't need, that there's no economic argument for buying one now that the touch is available.
We can fairly debate the missing features and capabilities of the touch and rail at Apple for not including them, whether out of spite or marketing savvy. The one feature that's beyond argument in favor of the touch: no monthly fees.
Reply
alulu said 1:53PM on 10-21-2007
The Touch is a phenomenal product. I love mine. I have had just about every form of music player in my posession from the 20g RioRiot to the first iPod photo. My wife has a nano, my daughter had one, we have shuffles all over the place.
I could never take my 60g iPod to the gym for fear of damaging the hard drive. Plus I ride a motorcycle and I didn't want to jiggle said HD too hard. I made that mistake and, whammo "sad ipod".
The touch has flash drive. But the nano does, too, you say. Yeah, but the touch's screen is so gorgeous and big that when I work out it is so beautiful to watch.
And it's freakishly thin for a device that does all this.
But it doesn't have an email client...wah! It's not supposed to. You really need to check your email? Log on, set gmail as a bookmark and, wham you're right there. They HAD to put Safari on there. Imagine for one second that they included the iTunes WiFi feature but had NO web browser. FanMonkeys would have gone ballistic. And you know what? The itunes feature is great. I don't buy that much digitally, but when we were out at the Promenade last weekend in Santa Monica (where there is free city wifi) and I heard a song over the loudspeaker of some store that I liked, 30 seconds later it was mine and I was sharing it with my wife and kid in the car. So, apple has created a product that seamlessly and quietly increases their own sales. And it's a great thing.
If I wanted an iphone I would have gotten one. I still do but I don't want to hack one and I don't want to be on at&t. As a friend of mine's brother (who works for apple in the Ipod dept) said to him regarding 3rd party apps) "You can do it. But it's not safe sex". And I agree.
I look forward to the SDK and what comes from it. In the meantime I will continue to enjoy the experience of my Touch. It is the best Ipod I have ever owned. But you are never going to be able to please everybody.
Reply
chucknasty said 12:26PM on 10-22-2007
I guess I am confused by the iPod Touch haters.
I own a touch because I don't want to pay AT&T a huge monthly bill for iPhone service. The touch has internet which covers most of my stocks and email checking needs (sending email with the faux-keyboard is NOT a real tempting prospect on touch or iPhone for me). BUT the primary reason I got it was to watch movies/shows on my train commute. The screen is great and having twice the memory of an iPhone I like it more.
Is the price prohibitive for some? Sure, but I remeber when I got my 15gig iPod years ago the 30gig model was $400. The iPhone is $400 PLUS $80 a month for TWO YEARS!!!! Do the math and tell me what the extra phone features cost, no seriously, think about how much the crappy 2mp camera and blue tooth costs.
I guess my point is this: if you think Apple isn't putting enough features in their products for you then please, don't buy them. If you seriously expect them to deliver a product that has all of your wildest dream applications on it and sells for $50 you are an idiot.
Reply
pentumforever said 1:13PM on 10-21-2007
#11
There is one issue you (most likely deliberately) oversee: Everything you mention needs additional Hardware which costs more (BTW all iMacs have as much RAM as the Mac Pro has, in case of the 2.8GHz model even more) while Software could be loaded on the iPod touch at no additional cost.
I accept that this kind of product placement is needed for Apple (I still don't really like it) - Daves article however is completely stupid fanboyism.
Here's hoping that you can download stuff like Mail or Calendar for the iPod touch in a few month in the iTunes Sore. I will go out and by one the same day I discover them (if they aren't too expansive)
Reply
Seraphim said 1:37PM on 10-21-2007
Didn't TUAW just decide to call Iphone and Ipod Touch the same thing because they were so alike? Why the hypocrisy?
Reply
koreyel said 1:37PM on 10-21-2007
#12 concludes with:
"The one feature that's beyond argument in favor of the touch: no monthly fees."
That's right for more than a few reasons:
1) Apple won't be able to deny servicing a broken Touch because a contract with AT&T doesn't exist. That anti-customer nonsense is out the door.
2) Some of us on principle refuse to give the net-neutrality hating AT&T a dime.
3) Some of us on principle refuse to give AT&T a dime for fear they will continue to sell-out their customer's right to privacy in exchange for no-bid contracts and favorable legislation from Big Brother.
4) Some of us expect VOIP will be hacked onto the ipod Touch.
Reply
(01) said 1:39PM on 10-21-2007
I wonder how their tune will change come Feb and a little-heard of SDK is released...Interesting times ahead for all.
Reply
punkassjim said 1:43PM on 10-21-2007
@yacoub
Sorry man, but your attitude is one of "Apple could have included X very easily, therefore I deserve it." Dude. Get over yourself. I don't care to be an Apple apologist, but given Apple's attitude and yours, I'd side with Apple anyday. They build the device exactly the way they decide to, and there are easily understood reasons for why they do it. Grasp it, and move on.
Reply