“The iPod may seem like a side act for Apple these days,” Dan Gallagher reports for The Wall Street Journal. “But the company has good reasons for keeping the music-player business humming.
“Apple updated its family of iPod Touch models this past week, adding more colors and the iSight camera to the entry-level version. It also cut prices across the line, reducing the price of the 16-gigabyte version by $30, to $199, and cutting $100 off the price tag of the largest version sporting 64GB, to $299,” Gallagher reports. “The iPod Touch helps to extend the company’s iOS operating software beyond smartphones and tablets, often to younger buyers not yet ready for (or able to afford) those other devices.”
“The hefty $100 cut to the price of the 64GB device is noteworthy,” Gallagher reports. “Larger memory units can hold more music, movies and games, so cutting the price of the 64GB device could boost sales of iTunes and App Store content that is becoming more important to Apple’s growth.”
Read more in the full article here.
Related articles:
Why Apple decided to introduce a new iPod and lower prices across the board – June 27, 2014
Apple’s new $50 iPod pricing tiers likely won’t make it iPhones and iPads – June 27, 2014
Apple slashes iPod touch prices, launches new 16GB model – June 26, 2014
Apple delivers iSight camera, multiple colors to most affordable iPod touch model – June 26, 2014
And you can make phone calls with Skype and iMessage, And you don’t have to pay a monthly bill. And they are great for walking and listening to audio books, so if you get mugged they won’t get your phone.
The iPod should now be called iPad Nano.
There, I said it.
That will be the name of the 5’5″ iPhone…
5 feet 5 inch! Really? Isn’t that a tad too big to fit in one’s pocket?
Yeah, the problem isn’t the touch. It’s the other players drag assing. Get rid of the nano and shuffle, kill the 4″ iPod touch and brand the new 5.5″ model as iPad nano.
I can’t believe Apple still makes standalone MP3 players in 2014. You’d think Steve would’ve killed those things years ago. It might be symptomatic of their ongoing struggle with the new era of music. They clearly didn’t know where to take us next, hence the Beats acquisition for Jimmy Iovine and Dre and other tastemakers within the company.
A stand-alone mp3 player is not ridiculous.
I, like tens of thousands of others, don’t have an iPhone because I have no need for one. Why should I have to pay an inflated price for a phone that I’d never use, just for music?
If the only music player I could get from Apple is an iPhone, I’d get some other company’s.
5.5″ iPod. I’ll buy one in a second. Perfect for reading and to check on my stocks and make trades.
If only you were CEO.
Have an iPhone 5 and an iPad Air, both 64GB, but still use my iPod Classic, as much as it needs an update, because of the 160GB storage capacity. Lots of room for 320 kb/s files and it still sounds pretty good with my Etymotic ER-4Ps.
With iTunes Radio I don’t know why Apple would make higher capacity devices.
The business is worth more than the Beats deal that Apple did and will always be.. Instead of 3 models Apple will be well served to launch only the 64 GB of the new version of Ipod touch and reduce the price to $199 – $249. They will get the numbers up easily with that than doing a head stand with the beats headphones.