I have no use for an iPod Touch right now. Not until they build one that is at least 128 GB - then it'll have the capacity I need. (I don't see why I'd want an iPod that can't hold all my music. I mean, what's the point?)
Do you like touch screens?
- Thread starter Sakrysta
- Start date
I never understood this argument.
Way back when I used to own 100 or so CDs. When I went out I'd grab 2 or 3 to take with me. So I was happy with 40 or so tracks of music.
Now you can take 4,000 and that's still not good enough. What happened over the last 10 years that changed 40=ok into 4,000=not-enough?
People got accustomed to having more in a single device, obviously. Not to mention that once a device is large enough you don't have to keep swapping things in and out. Ultimately it's a convenience thing... and it's pretty annoying when you're sitting on a plane on the other side of the country from your music collection and get a sudden urge to listen to a song you didn't sync because it wouldn't fit! It's not even an argument... just a product preference. Apple is well aware that there's a market for people who want their whole collection on one device which is why they still sell the iPod classic. And once memory prices come down enough over the next few years, the iPod Touch will be in that category as well.
It's not the quantity, as such. It's the fact that I want to take *all* of my music with me. That's important. If I had only 100 songs, I wouldn't want to take 80; if I had 1000, I wouldn't want to take 800; etc. I simply want all of my music together on one device.
I mainly use my iPod in the car, but it's also useful as a backup (I don't use CDs, I buy everything from the iTunes Store).
Last edited:
i fucking hate the touch-screens on our tills at work.
the lottery terminals not too bad, but the tills suck
the lottery terminals not too bad, but the tills suck
Yeah, and I have no problem on my husband's iPhone either. I thought I'd dislike it a lot because of smudges or things being too tiny, but I can type and navigate with ease on them.
I can see the benefit in touch screens, especially in context of interactive screen contexts (like a LCARS kind of situation), but my fingers are quite stubby, so the screens need to be big. Still, I won't mind sticking with my mouse in the meantime 
Also, I also only like physical tactile keyboards, since I learnt at an early age to touch type, which is difficult to do with a touch screen, since there are no tactile markers for the 'F' and 'J' keys on a touch screen for your fingers to feel and anchor themselves in terms of positioning for typing.
Also, I also only like physical tactile keyboards, since I learnt at an early age to touch type, which is difficult to do with a touch screen, since there are no tactile markers for the 'F' and 'J' keys on a touch screen for your fingers to feel and anchor themselves in terms of positioning for typing.
Almost certainly less than a public keyboard - you have to wipe touchscreens to keep them readable, how often do you think libraries etc wipe their keyboards?
I like touch screens unless I'm typing. I don't have tiny fingers.
I used to build kiosks w/ touch screens back in the 90's. While they are extraordinarily useful for kiosk design, I don't see much need for them in everyday use, with the possible exception of flat-screen laptop touch-tablets for sketching.
Similar threads
