128GB iPod Touch september 2010

[tacobellman]

actully the ipod touch is a better way to go it has more space and if you want it to be a phone you can make it into 1 hehe. i really want 1 bad but i don't have the money yet. i have stuff to trade but still no offers

p.s. is the new creative a touch??? i feel sorta out of it

[EmeraldICE898]

I'll be so happy if they add 64GB to the 2nd gen iPod Touch.

[Bernardo Gaetani]

Maybe with will be possible... I wait a 64GB by US$499 in september... Will be perfect!

[bobb-mini]

Originally Posted by natrino

..and I'm pretty certain will have 1 TerraByte flash before 2015

Nope. By 2015 u will be married and the ball&chain won't let u spend that kind of money on a mp3 player, and u'd say Yes, Dear if u know what's good for u.

[CrazyPodMan]

2015, we will have a 512 GB Touch. 2 Terrabyte Classic. book it.

[bobbit]

The Touch and Classic will be completely replaced by 2015

[5billion]

Haha, very true.

[Reubania]

Originally Posted by bobbit

The Touch and Classic will be completely replaced by 2015

Spot on!!!!

[LatinaC09]

i wonder how generations of ipods they are going to have.

[Astro_Digital]

Why do you always come back to Classic being in the end of its life?

Some people will always want a MP3 player and the Classic is a much better MP3 player that the touch.

Try to basic operations with a Touch in you pocket, like pause, increase, decrease volume or skip tracks. It is easy with the Classic iPod.

On top of that the Classic iPod is smaller.

Somebody talked about the Nano and Classic lines merging now that make sense.

Give me a 128 Gig Nano or 128 Gig Touch the Nano wins as far as I see.

[PG4G]

Yeah, but we are looking for a new computer platform, with multimedia functions.

You are looking for a sole mp3 player. Perhaps a combination of the Nano and classic in something mid way with flash or HHD will occur, who knows.

I personally don't see the Classic and Nano iPod brands in the same category as the Touch. The classic and nano are MP3 players, jazzed with some other cool bits.

Touch and iPhone are new devices as yet unexplored

[Surf Monkey]

Originally Posted by PG4G

I personally don't see the Classic and Nano iPod brands in the same category as the Touch. The classic and nano are MP3 players, jazzed with some other cool bits.

And that's why Classic isn't going to be replaced or disappear anytime soon. They are different devices from the Touch line. They're dedicated media players and a critical part of the Apple hand held lineup. The Touch line will expand, but it won't threaten the Classic and Nano iPods. Apple would be foolish to drop them. They'd cede a huge amount of the PMP market to Creative and others if they did.

[PINOY3000]

Originally Posted by enjoilax

um, there is a 160 gig iPod out now... so... you've been wrong for a long time.

He's talking about flash drives, not hard drives. The 160GB iPod doesn't use flash drives.

[XVI]

I still disagree with Surf Monkey. Almost no one buys Classics in comparison to Nanos, iPhones and iPod Touches. Once flash gets in the high double digits and the triple digits expect the classics to disappear. Gimmicks sell, the classic isn't a gimmick anymore. I doubt classics will exist in 3 years, maybe even 2 years. In 3 years Nanos will have 128GB flash drives which is more than enough for 90% of the market.

[Surf Monkey]

Originally Posted by XVI

I still disagree with Surf Monkey. Almost no one buys Classics in comparison to Nanos, iPhones and iPod Touches. Once flash gets in the high double digits and the triple digits expect the classics to disappear. Gimmicks sell, the classic isn't a gimmick anymore. I doubt classics will exist in 3 years, maybe even 2 years. In 3 years Nanos will have 128GB flash drives which is more than enough for 90% of the market.

Show some sales figures. Where does Classic actually rank? Your opinion is fine, but I'd like to know the facts.

The point here is that Apple will continue to offer a very large capacity player. There's simply no conceivable advantage to dropping high cap players simply because flash based units seem more appealing. One of the primary defining features of iPod is that you can store your whole library on one. By the time 128gig flash based players are available at a reasonable price, HDD based players will be pushing 700 gig. I don't see Apple wanting to take the PR backlash from dumping very large capacity players and I don't see them ceding the market for those players to other companies.