It's weird that they are stuck to the 4" screen size with the iPod Touch. I fully expected them to make one the size of iPhone 6, like every previous iPod Touch.
Oh absolutely, I can see that people still prefer that screen size, I'm just surprised that Apple decided not to go with a larger size on the iPod Touch.
But there are other differences. As with the previous generation iPod Touch, they actually cut a lot of subtle corners. Sure, there is some margin in the iPhone related to the cell plan subsidy, but there are some real cost cutting measures in there too. I think a reasonable way to think about it is that with the iPod Touch there is a strong incentive to compromise on the subtle things that users don't notice; the things Jobs always claimed they never compromised on (total fib).
The iPhone 5 vs. iPod Touch 5 was probably the closest the two ever came, the Touch's processor was still running with the 4S's processor/GPU/RAM and the 4's camera, and the body materials weren't equivalent.
Comments
It's weird that they are stuck to the 4" screen size with the iPod Touch. I fully expected them to make one the size of iPhone 6, like every previous iPod Touch.
Some of us prefer this screen size. I'm actually holding off until the 6s to see if they launch a model with a small screen.
Oh absolutely, I can see that people still prefer that screen size, I'm just surprised that Apple decided not to go with a larger size on the iPod Touch.
Reusing LCDs from iPhone 5 stock, perhaps?
The problem with the iPod Touch is that it highlights exactly how hefty the margin is on an iPhone.
64gb iPod = £249. 64gb iPhone 6 = £619.
If the only difference was GPS/Cell and a slightly larger battery it would hard to defend charging £370 for that.
But there are other differences. As with the previous generation iPod Touch, they actually cut a lot of subtle corners. Sure, there is some margin in the iPhone related to the cell plan subsidy, but there are some real cost cutting measures in there too. I think a reasonable way to think about it is that with the iPod Touch there is a strong incentive to compromise on the subtle things that users don't notice; the things Jobs always claimed they never compromised on (total fib).
The iPhone 5 vs. iPod Touch 5 was probably the closest the two ever came, the Touch's processor was still running with the 4S's processor/GPU/RAM and the 4's camera, and the body materials weren't equivalent.