Yesterday, Apple surprised many end-users by not including in its new iPod Touch any kind of camera either for still or video imaging. A lot of people have asked ‘why?’ and almost as many people will attempt to provide their own explanations (including me).
My explanation of this mysterious omission: the eventual introduction of an iPod camera as Veit and I have previously speculated. Yesterday’s announcement makes a lot of sense in this context, esp. when coupled with the announcement of a video-only Nano. Think about it: to get an Apple still image digital camera, you have to buy a separate device in addition to your iPod Touch or Nano , and in addition, because it will be a fairly limited-purpose device (imaging + WiFi + web browsing), perhaps Apple can devote more of its bill of materials to a better CMOS sensor.
The iPod Nano with 640×480x30fps video is is a smart strategic move—it’s Apple’s shot across the bows of the Pure Digital Cisco Flip video camera, which has proven to be an enormously successful low-end device, having sold millions and millions of units. But, unlike the Flip, the Nano does music as well, coupled with Apple’s vaunted usability.
So, if you have an iPhone 3GS, you get it all.
If you have a 2G iPod Touch, you need to buy a Nano to get video or an iPhone 3GS.
If you have a new Nano, you have video but no still imaging—so, perhaps you additionally buy a forthcoming Apple digital camera. Why would you buy a digital camera from Apple, a company that has much less credibility in the compact digicam space than Canon, Samsung, Sony, etc.? Again, the vaunted Apple usability and UI and cool form factor.
Did you enjoy this article? Please subscribe to iPhonePhotoVideo to receive all the updates on time and for free!
Related posts:
Comments on this entry are closed.