A tale of two reviews

[Tom]

I'm not talking about International markets as they are not relevant in a discussion unrelated to Apple's Finances. Apple makes money as they are lead by the world's foremost interior designer, and he does a damn good job making sure everything is sparkly, white and minimalistically elegant. Even if they can't hold a signal without interference from human hands.

you shouldn't discount the importance of industrial design. The greatest engineering in the world isn't worth much if no one can figure out how to use it or if it's not appealing.

 

[MJinZ]

you shouldn't discount the importance of industrial design. The greatest engineering in the world isn't worth much if no one can figure out how to use it or if it's not appealing.

They are important, just not to mass consumers and corporations who want to make money from them.

 

[Pliablemoose]

I'm not talking about International markets as they are not relevant in a discussion unrelated to Apple's Finances. Apple makes money as they are lead by the world's foremost interior designer, and he does a damn good job making sure everything is sparkly, white and minimalistically elegant. Even if they can't hold a signal without interference from human hands.

I'm trying to get you to understand that the bulk of Ipod Touches are sold overseas and many are sold to people with a lower standard of living than here and other developed countries, and that pre teens, tweens, enthusiasts, non-smartphone buying folk, like older people buy them in the US and other developed countries.

If it's such a big deal to you, buy an iPhone 4 and don't activate it. You'll have a WiFi mini tablet for $600, but what the heck, if that's what you want, don;t let me stop you.

I use a used iPhone 3G that way, it was cheaper than an iPod Touch, and it works as a GPS too

 

[MrX8503]

What exactly are "Apple Apps"? Are they magical?

Why don't you get an actually useful apple product like a Macbook Pro instead?

Because they don't make pants that are big enough to fit a Macbook Pro?

 

[Tom]

Apparently, it costs $3240 over two years as an added tax and does nothing else.

You NEED cell service. Most people also NEED data service.

The IamUselessTouch falls in the category of "extraneous device" or "I am a loser device" or "I am extremely poor but can afford this $229 device on my Welfare".

/Thread.

Sprint costs a at least $20 a month less than ATT. In my case it's more like $50 a month.

So an EVO with Sprint contract, and a Touch, are cheaper than an iphone with ATT contract.

 

[pm]

Stupidity.

The cost of the iPhone is $200 for the consumer.

The cost of the iAmUselessAndTouchMyself is $229 for the consumer.

No one gives a shit about what it really costs to make.

Please keep it civil, MJinz.

A 32GB iPod Touch is $299. A 32GB iPhone 4 without a contract is $699.
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/hom.../family/iphone (look down at the bottom under no contract prices).

If you want to ignore the cost of the contract and use the subsidized price, you still need to compare Apples to Apples (pun intended ) and use the same size devices. You are comparing an 8GB iPod Touch to a 16GB iPhone 4. Better to compare the 32GB devices.

 

[Tom]

Does this new Touch work with Skype ?

What about Google Voice ? I don't pay attention to the Google vs Apple news much since it doesn't affect me, where does Google Voice stand now and in the future on the Touch ?

 

[pm]

Does this new Touch work with Skype ?

What about Google Voice ? I don't pay attention to the Google vs Apple news much since it doesn't affect me, where does Google Voice stand now and in the future on the Touch ?

The new Touch does work with Skype - both outbound and inbound calls. Just download the Skype app from the app store.
http://blogs.skype.com/en/2010/07/iphone_multitasking_3g.html

Google Voice works as a web app, and it works pretty well, but it's not as nice as the Google Voice app for Android. If you want a better integrated Google Voice app, you'd need to jailbreak the Touch and I don't think that a jailbreak for it has been released yet. Even with the jailbreak and the Google Voice app, integration of Google Voice on Apple devices is not as good (IMO) as on Android devices.

 

[Narmer]

I'm not sure why some of you guys keep adding the cost of a two year contract when every other subsidized phone in America is similar. The thing with Apple is, unlike any other phone manufacturer, they take a cut of the monthly fee, in addition to charging the carrier an unsubsidized price. Therefore, they make far more from the iPhone even when you don't take the subsidy into account. So, Apple was already making a decent profit from the gap between what the consumer pays and what the carrier pays and the monthly fee they charge the carrier for having an iPhone. Hence, that is why I asked about iPhones/iPod Touches before 2010. Were the specs similar? If the answer is yes then, before this, Apple's costs to make either device was similar and Anand is right in that Apple is just trying to find a (new) way to gouge its customers. It makes sense from a business perspective but from a consumer perspective, again, Anand is correct in that this new Touch may not be worth the upgrade price and is poor at what it claims to do because of hardware limitations.

 

[MrX8503]

Stupidity.

The cost of the iPhone is $200 for the consumer.

The cost of the iAmUselessAndTouchMyself is $229 for the consumer.

No one gives a shit about what it really costs to make.

iPhone 4 16GB = $200 + $2000
iPod Touch 4 8GB = $229

How are these two devices priced at all anything alike? There are people out there who wants an MP3 player with iPhone like features. If that wasn't the case Apple wouldn't be selling millions of them. Oh, but I'm sure the answer to that is..its all marketing.

I'm not sure why some of you guys keep adding the cost of a two year contract when every other subsidized phone in America is similar. The thing with Apple is, unlike any other phone manufacturer, they take a cut of the monthly fee, in addition to charging the carrier an unsubsidized price.

Apple, HTC, Motorola, Samsung, they all take a cut from the carriers. This is not exclusive to Apple.

 

[Narmer]

iPhone 4 16GB = $200 + $2000
iPod Touch 4 8GB = $229

How are these two devices priced at all anything alike? There are people out there who wants an MP3 player with iPhone like features. If that wasn't the case Apple wouldn't be selling millions of them. Oh, but I'm sure the answer to that is..its all marketing.




Apple, HTC, Motorola, Samsung, they all take a cut from the carriers. This is not exclusive to Apple.

Are you sure about that? The other manufacturers get a cut of the monthly bill that the carrier charges the consumer?

 

[MrX8503]

Are you sure about that? The other manufacturers get a cut of the monthly bill that the carrier charges the consumer?

ALL cell phone manufacturers get a cut. Apple gets an extra cut because ATT is paying for its exclusivity.

No other carrier is paying for cell phone exclusive rights, thus Apple gets more money. However this does not change the fact that all cell phone manufacturers do get a cut.

 

[Tom]

I'm not sure why some of you guys keep adding the cost of a two year contract when every other subsidized phone in America is similar. The thing with Apple is, unlike any other phone manufacturer, they take a cut of the monthly fee, in addition to charging the carrier an unsubsidized price. Therefore, they make far more from the iPhone even when you don't take the subsidy into account. So, Apple was already making a decent profit from the gap between what the consumer pays and what the carrier pays and the monthly fee they charge the carrier for having an iPhone. Hence, that is why I asked about iPhones/iPod Touches before 2010. Were the specs similar? If the answer is yes then, before this, Apple's costs to make either device was similar and Anand is right in that Apple is just trying to find a (new) way to gouge its customers. It makes sense from a business perspective but from a consumer perspective, again, Anand is correct in that this new Touch may not be worth the upgrade price and is poor at what it claims to do because of hardware limitations.

Because the subsidy is ultimately paid by the consumer. The 32g Touch costs $299, the iphone costs a lot more than just the initial price so it's a lot more expensive.

What you and Anand are doing is discounting that real cost of an iphone on the basis that everybody's got a cell phone plan anyway. But that isn't true. There are pay as you go phones, and there are competitiors like Sprint and TMobile with much lower contract costs than ATT. Not to mention ATT doesn't have the best coverage and is an evil company. ;0

as far as gouging, I would think the Touch is substantially cheaper to make, no gps, no cell radio, less spec camera. But pricing isn't based on cost, that's true for all businesses. It isn't gouging, it's marketing.

 

[Narmer]

Because the subsidy is ultimately paid by the consumer. The 32g Touch costs $299, the iphone costs a lot more than just the initial price so it's a lot more expensive.

What you and Anand are doing is discounting that real cost of an iphone on the basis that everybody's got a cell phone plan anyway. But that isn't true. There are pay as you go phones, and there are competitiors like Sprint and TMobile with much lower contract costs than ATT. Not to mention ATT doesn't have the best coverage and is an evil company. ;0

A phone's true cost is the manufacturer's cost to make it. What they charge is another story entirely. As I keep pointing out and people here keep ignoring, an iPhone does not cost hundreds of dollars per unit more than a Touch. I would say that (until this year's models) the Touch and iPhone had similar costs. I would presume Apple did it like that in order minimize components and other things. However, an iTouch always cost a little more per GB size. This was because this was a direct sale between Apple and the consumer. However, now, Apple is lowering quality even more and charging the same price difference, thus increasing its income per unit.

 

[Tom]

A phone's true cost is the manufacturer's cost to make it. What they charge is another story entirely. As I keep pointing out and people here keep ignoring, an iPhone does not cost hundreds of dollars per unit more than a Touch. I would say that (until this year's models) the Touch and iPhone had similar costs. I would presume Apple did it like that in order minimize components and other things. However, an iTouch always cost a little more per GB size. This was because this was a direct sale between Apple and the consumer. However, now, Apple is lowering quality even more and charging the same price difference, thus increasing its income per unit.

What is your point ? You are comparing the subsidized price of an iphone to a retail price of a ipod Touch and then equating that to the true cost of manufacturing.

The true cost of manufacturing doesn't have much if anything to do with the retail price. If the Touch did have gps and did have the outstanding camera of the iphone, the retail price would be higher based on the perceived value the consumer would have. It would replace even more consumer products than it already does.

But that higher retail price would make it less appealing to their target audience, which doesn't care about gps or a fancy camera. Obviously, because they are selling like hotcakes.

If I could design my own Touch, maybe I would delete some features and sell it for $179, but the mix of features it has is very appealing for $229.

Complaining it isn't the same as a $600 phone, and ignoring what it can do which is frankly amazing, because in the old days it was more like a less capable phone doesn't make sense.

The next time Anand reviews a video card that costs $200 or more I hope he points out it doesn't come with gps. For that price everytihng should come with gps, right ?

 

[Narmer]

What is your point ? You are comparing the subsidized price of an iphone to a retail price of a ipod Touch and then equating that to the true cost of manufacturing.

The true cost of manufacturing doesn't have much if anything to do with the retail price. If the Touch did have gps and did have the outstanding camera of the iphone, the retail price would be higher based on the perceived value the consumer would have. It would replace even more consumer products than it already does.

But that higher retail price would make it less appealing to their target audience, which doesn't care about gps or a fancy camera. Obviously, because they are selling like hotcakes.

If I could design my own Touch, maybe I would delete some features and sell it for $179, but the mix of features it has is very appealing for $229.

Complaining it isn't the same as a $600 phone, and ignoring what it can do which is frankly amazing, because in the old days it was more like a less capable phone doesn't make sense.

The next time Anand reviews a video card that costs $200 or more I hope he points out it doesn't come with gps. For that price everytihng should come with gps, right ?

OK, please tell me the amazing things the 2010 iPod Touch can do.

 

[pm]

OK, please tell me the amazing things the 2010 iPod Touch can do.

Why does he need to do that?

The thread is about two different reviews of the same device - one review thought it was great and seemed to downplay some of the shortcomings while the other review generally loved it. Then Pliable posted a bunch of review summaries - would have been nice to have links but still, the summaries are interesting.

Now we get down through this thread and we have a group of people who really like the new iPod Touch, and a group who really don't. A fact of which is almost amusing given the subject of the thread.

I personally fall into the group who is not so impressed... but still, why do we need a summary of the features of the new iPod Touch? And how will it change your opinion if he posts them?

We can debate pricing and subsidies and these are matters of objective fact, but whether or not someone thinks it's a useful device or great or crap or whatever is a matter of subjective opinion.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Why does he need to do that?

Then Pliable posted a bunch of review summaries - would have been nice to have links but still, the summaries are interesting.

Now we get down through this thread and we have a group of people who really like the new iPod Touch, and a group who really don't. A fact of which is almost amusing given the subject of the thread.

I personally fall into the group who is not so impressed... but still, why do we need a summary of the features of the new iPod Touch? And how will it change your opinion if he posts them?

We can debate pricing and subsidies and these are matters of objective fact, but whether or not someone thinks it's a useful device or great or crap or whatever is a matter of subjective opinion.

Sorry, didn't even think of posting links, they're from an mashup that Gizmodo did of iPod Touch reviews, links here:

http://reviews.cnet.com/mp3-players/apple-ipod-touch-2010/4505-6490_7-34167378.html?tag=also

http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/07/ipod-touch-review-2010/

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/edwardbaig/2010-09-08-baig08_ST_N.htm

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2368786,00.asp

http://www.slashgear.com/ipod-touch-nano-and-shuffle-review-apples-best-ipod-lineup-yet-07101209/

All that being said, I find the iPod Touch a compelling device, but for my $, I scrounged up a used 3G and use it as a bastard Touch with navigation. Mostly because at work everyone whips out their iPhones or Touches and plugs them into docks and plays music during our procedures, and I make sure to get my phone in the dock before the dude that loves Hawaiian music and the guy that loves big band music, and the doctor that loves obscure rock and plays air keyboard during the cases...



I wouldn't even mind finding a 3GS with a little faster processor, I hacked the 3G to use the microsim of my 3G iPad as well, it's sort of nifty, like a magical mini iPad

And as a quick aside, I would never allow some of the posters here to be in any position of authority, they're not objective and are arguing some damn useless points...

Where some are ranting, I see a hell of a business model for some enterprising corporation to build a killer Android based PMP, throw in some docks, maybe partner with Logitech or one of the major accessory makers to build a line of docks etc...

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

#1 - Stop using the contract price of an iPhone. That's absolutely ridiculous. For people who understand unlocked phones, these things run for $599 at LEAST. In the US it's OK to switch around carriers because you MUST do so to get a phone.

In the rest of the world, while they do have subsidy pricing, MANY people stick to the same carrier forever and ever. This is because there's no need to switch to get the other phone. Even if the iPhone is exclusive, almost everyone else is on GSM anyway, so all they do is buy an unlocked one and slap their SIM in. Done. So yes, maybe here everyone equates the iPhone to a $199 product, but it really isn't. It's just NOT a fair comparison.

#2 - I do like how Anand notices a lot of things many reviewers DON'T. He was one of the few who pointed out the iPhone originally did not have a multitouch keyboard but now does. He was one who also dove into the iPhone 4 reception issue and looked at how attenuation was compared to other devices in terms of dB and correlated dB to bars.

I don't see many reviewers doing so. It might be the way he evaluates CPU reviews and stuff. However, I see him very concerned with more paper features and how certain specs play out than overall usability/etc.

#3 - regarding the OP's post about the speaker, I think that the speaker means little. Yes, you might use it for Facetime, but how often do you use your speakerphone on your phone when you're not driving? I don't want everyone to hear my conversation at home. Unless I really want to type on my computer but even then I don't think I'll be paying attention. I'd much rather put on a set of headphones and go about my business. So yes, how often will you be using that speaker?

 

[TheStu]

#1 - Stop using the contract price of an iPhone. That's absolutely ridiculous. For people who understand unlocked phones, these things run for $599 at LEAST. In the US it's OK to switch around carriers because you MUST do so to get a phone.

In the rest of the world, while they do have subsidy pricing, MANY people stick to the same carrier forever and ever. This is because there's no need to switch to get the other phone. Even if the iPhone is exclusive, almost everyone else is on GSM anyway, so all they do is buy an unlocked one and slap their SIM in. Done. So yes, maybe here everyone equates the iPhone to a $199 product, but it really isn't. It's just NOT a fair comparison.

#2 - I do like how Anand notices a lot of things many reviewers DON'T. He was one of the few who pointed out the iPhone originally did not have a multitouch keyboard but now does. He was one who also dove into the iPhone 4 reception issue and looked at how attenuation was compared to other devices in terms of dB and correlated dB to bars.

I don't see many reviewers doing so. It might be the way he evaluates CPU reviews and stuff. However, I see him very concerned with more paper features and how certain specs play out than overall usability/etc.

#3 - regarding the OP's post about the speaker, I think that the speaker means little. Yes, you might use it for Facetime, but how often do you use your speakerphone on your phone when you're not driving? I don't want everyone to hear my conversation at home. Unless I really want to type on my computer but even then I don't think I'll be paying attention. I'd much rather put on a set of headphones and go about my business. So yes, how often will you be using that speaker?

When the iPhone first came out it wasn't a multi-touch keyboard? Where did he write that I must have missed it.

I might use the speaker if I am playing games on it.

There are quite a few full length, very impressive games for the iPhone/Touch, some of which are exclusives, but the majority are short time wasters, crosswords, sudoku, card games, puzzle games things of that nature.

 

[Narmer]

Why does he need to do that?

The thread is about two different reviews of the same device - one review thought it was great and seemed to downplay some of the shortcomings while the other review generally loved it. Then Pliable posted a bunch of review summaries - would have been nice to have links but still, the summaries are interesting.

Now we get down through this thread and we have a group of people who really like the new iPod Touch, and a group who really don't. A fact of which is almost amusing given the subject of the thread.

I personally fall into the group who is not so impressed... but still, why do we need a summary of the features of the new iPod Touch? And how will it change your opinion if he posts them?

We can debate pricing and subsidies and these are matters of objective fact, but whether or not someone thinks it's a useful device or great or crap or whatever is a matter of subjective opinion.

Why? Because he called them amazing. Subjective, I know, but it does not change the fact that this is a device that does some of its most advertisted features poorly.

 

[Narmer]

#1 - Stop using the contract price of an iPhone. That's absolutely ridiculous. For people who understand unlocked phones, these things run for $599 at LEAST. In the US it's OK to switch around carriers because you MUST do so to get a phone.

In the rest of the world, while they do have subsidy pricing, MANY people stick to the same carrier forever and ever. This is because there's no need to switch to get the other phone. Even if the iPhone is exclusive, almost everyone else is on GSM anyway, so all they do is buy an unlocked one and slap their SIM in. Done. So yes, maybe here everyone equates the iPhone to a $199 product, but it really isn't. It's just NOT a fair comparison.

#2 - I do like how Anand notices a lot of things many reviewers DON'T. He was one of the few who pointed out the iPhone originally did not have a multitouch keyboard but now does. He was one who also dove into the iPhone 4 reception issue and looked at how attenuation was compared to other devices in terms of dB and correlated dB to bars.

I don't see many reviewers doing so. It might be the way he evaluates CPU reviews and stuff. However, I see him very concerned with more paper features and how certain specs play out than overall usability/etc.

#3 - regarding the OP's post about the speaker, I think that the speaker means little. Yes, you might use it for Facetime, but how often do you use your speakerphone on your phone when you're not driving? I don't want everyone to hear my conversation at home. Unless I really want to type on my computer but even then I don't think I'll be paying attention. I'd much rather put on a set of headphones and go about my business. So yes, how often will you be using that speaker?

We're talking about the Touch here so #3 is invalid. Paying $30 more for a headset that has a microphone is gouging imho.

 

[Raduque]

The cost of the iPhone is $200 for the consumer with a 2 year contract that costs a minimum of $1,440 over those 2 years to a whopping $3240 with "unlimited" service + tax, fees, etc.

You know, I never bought into this line of reasoning. I mean, if you're looking at getting a cellphone, you're going to pay for this service, no matter what device you go with, so that cost is going to be paid regardless of which device you get.

IMO, I think it's disingenuous to say that an iPhone4 costs $1500-3300, because you need the monthly service charge to use it. Now, if you want to say it costs $1500 to USE the device WITH CELLULAR SERVICE over the life of the contract, I'm fine with that. But just saying "oh it costs $1500 to buy" is very wrong.

The cost of the hardware itself, does not change if whether you need 450 minutes or 9001 minutes. It's outright wrong to imply that. The phone hardware costs $200 (subsidized) or $640 (unsubsidized), period.

 

[Tom]

Why? Because he called them amazing. Subjective, I know, but it does not change the fact that this is a device that does some of its most advertisted features poorly.

What does it do poorly ?

 

[Tom]

We're talking about the Touch here so #3 is invalid. Paying $30 more for a headset that has a microphone is gouging imho.

microphone headset isn't needed. there's a built in mic that Anand says works fine, if I havent confused reviews he just doesn't know how it works since it's on the back. he says it works tho.