Earlier iPod touch with camera leak vindicated in light of 3rd gen teardown
By Ross Miller 
posted Sep 13th 2009 7:18PM
posted Sep 13th 2009 7:18PM
Please note: If you're a current Engadget commenter, you do not need to re-register. Simply login and you will be prompted to select a username.
they must have had a reason to remove a potentual selling point though.... iphone competition?
That's the only reason I can think of. I think most of agree that the "game device" line Jobs gave out was complete BS.
no, they didn't need to create a spot for a camera to figure out it's iphone competition. It probably looked relatively bad on the iphone sized display with a nano caliber camera. jobs probably pulled it last minute because it didn't jive with apples standards
If they were worried about cannibalizing iPhone sales, they wouldn't have built that camera spot in in the first place.
It is most likely that they had a technical issue last minute and decided to take the cameras out.
If the ipod touch had a camera then it would be EVERYTHING that the iPhone is - minus the phone.
Why would Apple want to allow you to buy a great device like the iPhone/ipod allowing you to take pictures and email them via wifi or upload them to your facebook/twitter/etc ...and slight themselves ?
If the ipod touch had everything minus the iphone's phone, then you could keep your old cellular phone, your old service and have the best of both worlds. After all, most other phones require expensive data services to do alot of what the ipod touch does. Phones like the STORM don't even have WiFi. Neither Storm nor Pre have access to the amount of apps ipod touch has.
I bet apple leaving out the camera was an AT&T decision more than an Apple decision.
lol great gaming device = dsi; which happens to have a camera, i believe
Yep, they don't want it to kill the iphone i guess that's why they have removed the camera.
For the nano it was okay because it does not compete with the ipod touch which is iphone clone without the "phone"
iPhone competition? Who in their right mind would be like... "iPod Touch or iPhone. I need a camera so badly I am also willing to hand over $90 to ATT a month just so my iPod can have a camera too."
Illogical, no?
Maybe because if it sucked as hard as the one on hte Nano, it would end up being a negative?
This is a camera that can't take pictures.
@Quantumphysics
you forgot about the compass, built in microphone, and gps unit
I agree with DR. I want a camera with at least iPhone 3GS quality, not the nano crap.
@DR : agreed, the "camera" in the Nano is pathetic. Apple claimed that it deposed Flip's pocket camcorders, but have they not noticed that Fliip, Kodak, Creative, Sony all have some rather spiffy _HD_ camcorders? Heck, the Zi8 even has image stabilization, which you can bet something as light and tiny as the Nano needs.
Steve Jobs already said they removed it because a still camera wouldn't fit. The one in there must have been low-res and Apple didn't want to ship it that way.
This is all assuming you can believe a word Steve Jobs says, which quite possibly isn't the case.
this is idiotic, they removed the camera b/c it'd be a direct competitor with the iphone, really?
this would make sense if the previous touches and iphones weren't generally exactly the same except for the phone part. a camera would not take sales away from the iphone. the only major decision between the touch and iphone is the phone portion and att.
Reluttr
Actually I didn't forget.
The Compass is only in the 3GS and that's brand new. The GPS unit is unnescessary to use google Maps and it isn't on the original iPhone either. People still have those.
The microphone is irrelevant because with iPod Touch you can use headphones with Mics to access SKYPE and make/recieve calls.
Technically, the iPod Touch and the iPhone (not the 3GS) are equal to everything but the phone and its services.
Placing a camera in it would make it an all around powerful device and would hurt iPhone sales because people could use their regular old phone and simply carry this too - accessing free WiFi whenever they got ready. Emailing pics, updating Facebook, etc.
I am pretty sure it was removed as a big F U to whoever leaked it and the gadget blogs that propagated it.
Yes Steve Jobs has a history of doing that. IIRC, he did it to ATI a few years back.
The flip cameras have awful quality too. You're talking about garbage versus rank garbage here.
If you pay extra to get "720p" from these other companies, you are taking yourself for a ride. As long as the lens and sensor are the size of a matchhead, you're never going to get any actual quality, no matter how high a "p" figure you put on it.
I bought a 5G Nano yesterday simply because I wanted a portable video camera and do not want to upgrade my iPhone. I also looked at the Kodak, Flip, etc. but they simply were too big. I wanted a small camera I can take with me everywhere without carrying a big device in my pocket, so the Nano fits that well. So if you say that they do not want to cannibalize iPhone sales by putting a camera in the iTouch, then they would not have put one in the Nano, as people would be more inclined to spend $149 for a Nano than the cost of a 3GS and the monthly fees.
Next time they have a Nano article, I will post my impressions, I think it would surprise a lot of people what I say...
@ NohOne
I also bought one on the day it was released at the retail store here in my town. I've been wanting a camera, headphones & new ipod also and people have been complaining about not taking still pictures, well you can still edit your movies and take a screen shoot on your computer for a still picture. Pretty lame run around but works.
I agree though that more are inclined to buy the 149 price especially in these economical times. Daddy & Mommy can kill two birds with one stone for there nagging daughter about getting a camera and ipod! Hahahaha.
Just because we gadget fanatics desiring the latest hot items in the tech market, we are a pretty small percent in the consumer market. So please everyone stop bitching, instead put your thought towards improvements on devices that are already out, and stop kicking & screaming about not getting your rumored products.
I still don't get it that why you guys are so desperate to have a not-so-good camera in touch?
Seriously???
Then you guys will complain for reduced battery life.
And will you guys be happy with a very low quality of pics?
It's all quite obvious. The iPhone is their crown jewel. They need to have a few things to keep it looking worthwhile over the touch.
The whole presentation was a joke, again. Their main focus on the touch as a "gaming device" made me laugh and roll my eyes. Trying to compare it heavily to the DSi and PSP is hysterical. Apple has always focused on all of their "features" and "improvements" and to not add a camera to the touch and try to pull it off as a "gaming device" is complete BS.
We all know that for years Apple bots have been clamoring for a gaming device from Apple (why, we don't know). Now it seems as though Apple is trying to force themselves into the market without having to do any work by trying to persuade the public into believing the touch is a gaming device. The touch is not and in it's current state never will be a gaming device. Sure you can play some quick 5 minute games when you're bored, but beyond that it does not have the input needed to be considered game worthy and playable. You need physical buttons, there is absolutely no question about that. And pressing a "button" on the screen, there by covering up half your screen with your fingers, is no substitute.
That said, I'm sure we will be seeing a camera in the touch next year, and it will be portrayed by Apple as the coming of Christ.
@NohOne:
The fact that you specifically purchased a Nano for recording video, with it's crappy crappy quality and all, tells me how much of an Apple toolbag you are. Do you even care about quality and resolution? Because seriously, the Nano camera is a pathetic excuse by Apple to re-sell a device with "new features"
Steve is really wishing that we didn't know this...
Jordan that is quite simply the funniest thing I have ever heard here on Engadget, thank-you for the laugh. If you were being serious, obviously you are new to these parts and should read some of my posting history/ Go on, click my name up there in blue. You can also search for my name, NohOne or "NohOne - The official hater, stalker, and psychopath", a name given to me by Apple fanboys. If you were joking, then that is the best thing I have ever heard, kudos to you.
Oh so you're just a troll huh
Could be simple marketing. It is a selling point, but so were all the upgrades they did release. Be ready for a spring launch with 802.11n FM transmission and a Camera.
Frankly, I can't see why anyone is surprised there's a space for the camera at all.
Since the two devices are essentially the same guts, it's easy to for Apple to just tell the ODM to not put the camera on unit X. This has been happening in the mobile device space for years.
i wouldnt like this anyway, i would want the camera on the back!
or maybe its on both sides!
wow... no.
just no.
Fail.
@ William. They're not really evenly matched at this point. The zune is a better device.
@ Arcaria
Yes, the Zune HD is the better device, but in terms of "functionality" they do almost all the same things as each other.
Apple releasing a camera will just be something else to rub in the Zunes face.
They really don't seem to care much about the Tegra or the HD Out video...
wow such important news...
Wow such an important comment...
Wow, another important comment.
wow 3 important comments in a row
btw i will be getting a zune hd
Mind if I join the 'important comment' train?
wow. you guys did it, a whole important thread.
I haven't posted enough recently to feel important, mind if I catch the coat tails of this important posts thread..
Thanks.. I feel heaps more significant now.
I don't get it then... why no camera on iPod Touch?
Also, the camera on the Nano is at such an odd place.
They had problems with the camera right before launch. That's why all of the 3rd Gen iPod Touch cases all have holes for the camera.
It's so they can release it next year with the camera in place and charge you an extra $50-$100...
I don't know why people say Apple is so consumer-friendly or revolutionary when they hold back their devices so much.
I'm probably going to get low-ranked because pro-apple fanboys hate any Apple slight.
Can no one see that Apple does what it does to keep its stock prices where they are? Apple is more profitable than numerous car companies are (especially the bankrupt ones).
I think there is a serious order of magnitude in difference between a car company and a computer company.
Maybe Steve scrapeed the camera because it wasn't good enough for a "premium product". If the rumors are to be believed, Steve has scrapped many projects before for reasons like that.
It could have been a supply issue. Perhaps their camera supplier just wasn't ready to ship in the volume that Apple requires.
Perhaps once they get all their assembly lines humming, then we'll see a new product.
They didn't put camera on iPod touch because they want to shift the old stock, 'the most popular PMP in the world' the nano. So you get the old nano cases that have been lying around, machine a hole in the back, bake some new finish on them, pop a camera on the board and there you have it, a PMP with camera.
Now if they'd launched iPod touch with camera also they would have needed to do the full range of touch's including the 8gig with the camera. So how many iPod nano's you think they would have shifted this Christmas, not as many as they would have liked to. There you have it, wait till next year when the nano stock is running down and launch new nano and new iPod touch with camera and possibly OLED but I seriously wouldn't hold your breath on that. Also launch micro app's for the nano and Classic, or maybe not.
@ HC
Really? If nothing else, Apple doesn't tend to charge you MORE for the upgrades to their product lines. There was more likely a last minute tech issue that prevented them from putting it in.
They probably removed it to see how well the Zune HD and the iPod Touch could compete, since they're almost evenly matched at this point in time in terms of functionality.
After the Zune HD has it's share of the spotlight, Apple will just pull it out and say "Oh, looky here! A camera!"
It's the only reason I can come up with as to why they cut it in the first place.
Ya i think they got rid of it is because the Zune hd does not have one and Microsoft talked to apple and paid some $ (like they do for 360s games with Sony) to get rid of it so the ipod Touch has nothing more than the incredible Zune HD.