4 ms·

I think from Apple's perspective having the Nano with a video camera could be a stand alone device. Meaning lots of people might buy it to use only as a video c

by jsz0 17y ago

I think from Apple's perspective having the Nano with a video camera could be a stand alone device. Meaning lots of people might buy it to use only as a video camera. In which case Apple is happy to sell you a Touch and a Nano. They control enough of the market to create these artificial segmentations. I'm sure they have market research on it.

roc 17y ago
I can't imagine Apple is so dumb as to think that the current situation is a desirable one, or that a wholly artificial segmentation like that would fly with customers. No-one with a Touch is going to get a Nano for the camera. They'll just keep using their crappy phone or get a Flip. Not having the video camera in the Touch is a huge missed opportunity, whose net result is lower hardware sales, period.
- GHFigs 17y ago
  or get a Flip. This does not seem obvious to me. The Flip Ultra (4GB) is $149, the Ultra HD (8GB) is $199. Compare the iPod Nano at $149 (8GB) and $179 (16GB). The Flip may be a better camera, but the Nano is clearly competitive, even ignoring it's other features. whose net result is lower hardware sales The Nano is the top selling iPod model. They released a new model with at least one significant new feature that wholly replaces another product category in the same price range. How do you conclude that will result in lower sales?
  - unalone 17y ago
    But is the Nano at all close to the Flip's quality? I'm doubting it shoots in HD.
    - GHFigs 17y ago
      It doesn't, but then neither does the $149 model of Flip.
- dirtyaura 17y ago
  I feel that there's a big market for Nano with a camera that iPod Touch with a camera couldn't really serve. I know many people who don't want to buy a mobile phone with unnecessary features. It's not just cost awareness. They want simple things. And the music player & Camera combo is a simple. They couldn't care less about apps and web browsing functionality in their music player. They will care about those in 2014, but not today and new Nano is targeting that crowd.

by jsz0 17y ago

roc 17y ago

I can't imagine Apple is so dumb as to think that the current situation is a desirable one, or that a wholly artificial segmentation like that would fly with customers. No-one with a Touch is going to get a Nano for the camera. They'll just keep using their crappy phone or get a Flip. Not having the video camera in the Touch is a huge missed opportunity, whose net result is lower hardware sales, period.

GHFigs 17y ago
or get a Flip. This does not seem obvious to me. The Flip Ultra (4GB) is $149, the Ultra HD (8GB) is $199. Compare the iPod Nano at $149 (8GB) and $179 (16GB). The Flip may be a better camera, but the Nano is clearly competitive, even ignoring it's other features. whose net result is lower hardware sales The Nano is the top selling iPod model. They released a new model with at least one significant new feature that wholly replaces another product category in the same price range. How do you conclude that will result in lower sales?
- unalone 17y ago
  But is the Nano at all close to the Flip's quality? I'm doubting it shoots in HD.
  - GHFigs 17y ago
    It doesn't, but then neither does the $149 model of Flip.
dirtyaura 17y ago
I feel that there's a big market for Nano with a camera that iPod Touch with a camera couldn't really serve. I know many people who don't want to buy a mobile phone with unnecessary features. It's not just cost awareness. They want simple things. And the music player & Camera combo is a simple. They couldn't care less about apps and web browsing functionality in their music player. They will care about those in 2014, but not today and new Nano is targeting that crowd.