NY Times asks, Steve answers: Why no camera on the iPod touch and no stills on the nano?

Apple,

What's wrong with you guys? You want to meet the price at $199 for the 8 GB, Great.
Charge a lot more on 32GB or 64GB, and you should of put the camera on it.
You could of capture the whole market to those non iPhone users. Morons!

Google "iSkin Touch Duo"

It blows my mind that even makers of products for the iPod Touch have made cases with holes on the back for cameras, holes on the front for cameras... I mean wtf man, why do I have a feeling there is something more at play here. :-/

They didn't put a camera on the touch because they still want people to have a reason to upgrade to an iPhone.

I'd guess the nano got a vid camera because it's most likely not selling so well and a major upgrade like this will change that for sure.

I personally was hoping for an FM radio, silly as it sounds. My gym has TVs all over it that have FM channels to listent to it, and it would have been nice to consolidate to one music player. It completely sucks that I have an Ipod for everywhere else, and a $30 sandisk MP3 player for when I go to the Gym. And before you say get a nano, I already have one, so why buy another one @ $150 just to get this. GPS would have been nice as well...

AFAIK Apple have never promised that a Camera was definitely coming in the September 9th iPod update.

You all listened to the Rumor mill and before you knew it Rumor become FACT !

And you wonder why you were so disappointed on this update ....

It is like a Swiss Army knife. There are different kinds with different attachments for different needs.

Just saying, "if you want a camera, suck it up and buy an iPhone" is all good and fine, but people who wield the money should have some say in what sells and what doesn't, don't you agree?

I think in this case the message will be loud and clear. I think the 64Gig with camera would have fetched tidy profits for Steve-o and company; one way or another. I guess the profits are coming in no matter what so they can afford to follow their business plan, ie. " hold off until the Touch 4G for a camera".

It's almost like cut and paste all over again.

Add me to the list of people disappointed in Apple for not adding cameras to the iTouch line.

Add me to the list of people who call it an iTouch too :P

Can't we all just get along ;)

The iPod Touch is a sleek piece of kit, and Apple has upgraded it without having to re-design the outer shell and, I would guess, the innards.

Do you want the iPod Touch to become bulkier/thicker/heavier/whatever?

Seriously, folks... some people are never satisfied. Maybe you lot should apply for jobs with Jobs and see where it takes you... probably get fired as soon as you open your mouth.

I used to have a Nokia N95 with a fairly decent 5MP camera on it. I also got my daughter a HP 5MP camera, but when I decided to take up photography again, I bought myself a 6MP Nikon dSLR -- now, my daughter won't touch the N95 or the HP P&S anymore and hogs the Nikon at every opportunity. Oh, and I rarely use the camera on the iPhone 3GS.

Five years ago I did pay $499 for 3rd gen iPod and loved it for every penny. I would easily pay the same for an iPod touch that was similar to the iPhone without the phone. In the long run it would still be cheaper than buying an iPhone since I don't use a cellphone or need a data plan.

Does it have an iPhone 3GS screen?