my ipod touch broke after the warrenty expired and i wanted to replace it. But i’ll wait for the 3rd gen. if they don’t deliver i’ll just find some other device to rule my life.

all i wanted is, better battery, a camera, a mic

but they have gone for gaming what a joke

Customers didn’t tell Apple that, focus groups did. That’s not the same thing. Apple, no doubt likes focus groups rather than just talking the customers or (gasp!) simply initiating open online discussion groups. A focus group often has to sign a confidentially clause, for instance. That fits Apple’s culture of secrecy.

I’ve been in more than of few focus groups–including, years ago, one to replace the rainbow Apple logo. But I’ve always wondered why companies depend on them. The people that come, and I say this of myself, aren’t “normal.” Most don’t have fixed schedules, or they wouldn’t have time for the group. Most aren’t making much money, or the typically modest payments wouldn’t be worth all the driving. They’re also filtered in odd sorts of ways. I often don’t get in a group because I don’t use a certain product. I laugh and tell the screener that the company has it backwards. They ought to be questioning people who do not use their product rather than those who do.

The groups themselves are a joke. The formalities often steer the results in a certain direction set in advance. Boeing did a study in the early 1980s, just as PCs began to take off, that concluded that the future in computing lay in time-sharing terminals. It no doubt proved what some VP wanted to prove, but was a joke from day one. The iPod touch as primarily a game machine is a similar joke, although not a very funny one.

Even worse, conversation in focus groups tends to be dominated by those with loud mouths, little brains, and weird attitudes. I once participated in a study group at Microsoft intended to find needed improvements for Excel. I went planning to stress that Microsoft needed to make their products create beautiful output by default. I never got my POV across. Discussion was dominated by two people. A salesman thought the graphs that Excel produced were not glaring enough. He wanted them to be in-your-face ugly. The other was a really strange guy who wanted computers to be his friend–perhaps because he had so few of the human sort. He wanted help interfaces that looked like someone was talking to him. We all remember when Microsoft tried to do that sort of thing.

Now lets look at Apple, which came up with brilliant, breakthrough ideas in their touch-screen interface. Earlier this week I talked with a friend who’d gotten a 1-G iPhone simply because someone gave it to him. Skeptical at first, within a few days he was delighted by it, showing it off to any and all. He’s likely to be even more happy when he discovers the App Store.

But as Schiller and Jobs have admitted and despite the high sales, Apple has been clueless about how to market what they have created. In the U.S. they locked themselves into one of the least-liked cell providers. When LTE becomes the standard for virtually, maybe they will escape that trap.

For the touch, they at least admit their problem: “they had no idea how to market the iPod touch.” Actually, it’d be better to say that they had no idea how to create touches that would market themselves. Jobs and Schiller seem to spend too much time with marketing types who prefer image to reality.

What they’re selling is a marvelous interface and a standard platform that provides developers with millions of potential customers through an App Store that levels the playing field for those selling. What they’ve not done is create devices for the all the uses people want to make of their ideas. They’re stuck in a one-shoe-fits-all model, which means, in this case, they blunder into supporting just one market–gamers. It’s like Toyota or Ford discuss what The Car they make should be like, should it be fast, roomy, carry a lot of stuff, or get good gas mileage. The answer is not an impossible-to-create The Car. It’s many models, each for a particular sort of customer.

Apple is making that sort of blunder. The brilliant UI-to-app-store they’ve created supports many potential products not just two. Here are some:

1. There’s the iPhone for those who need a phone and always available Internet and don’t mind paying extra and klutzing with AT&T.

2. There are gamers, who no doubt want speed and could care less about phones, mikes, and a GPS. They’re getting all the attention now.

3. There are creative/work/productivity people (such as me) who don’t want the hassle and costs of cellular contracts, but do want almost all the features of an iPhone, especially a decent camera and mike, which are good for on-the-go note taking. These are the ones Apple just slighted very badly, saying in essence, “You’re not gamers, get an iPhone or get lost.”

4. People often spend quite a bit on their vacations. They spend thousands of dollars in travel and accommodation and hundreds for guide books. Then they promptly get lost. There should be a touch just for them, one with a long battery life and GPS. One that’s rugged but not heavy. One that does what travelers want, including good VoIP features for calling home via Skype or the like.

5. Don’t forget kids. The UI is so intuitive that kids pick it up quickly. Why not a kid’s model, a bit bigger so it can have enough battery life for a long trip, and rugged enough to take abuse. I could also have a lock so it only runs kid-safe applications.

6. And finally, there are the outdoor/recreational users who need a device that’s rugged, waterproof and includes a GPS and an extended battery life. Although a lot of Apple employees fit this category, I see no indication that Apple is even aware of this market.

A good parallel is to the GPS market. When it began to take off in the mid-90s, the gadgets were of the one-shoe-fits-all variety. Over time, manufacturers began to understand the need to target specific markets: marine for those with boats, auto for those needing help getting places, and rugged, waterproof models for those outdoors. Each is different, but each is a GPS.

Apple hasn’t done that. It knows is wants a phone and that, to stay competitive it needs to add features. But for any other use of that wonderful UI-to-App-Store idea they’re clueless by their own admission. They think this marvelous scheme should have one use only and blunder about trying to find it, like some demented automaker trying to create The Car and leaving everyone unhappy.

What Apple need are several pocket-sized products that use their brilliant ideas, products roughly equivalent to what I have detailed above. And because each is tailored to a specific market, each can maximize the features for that group while keeping the price down.

–Michael W. Perry, Seattle

It is just annoying as i had planned on getting a ipod touch after this event.

i wanted more battery life on it and a few other hardware updates, as well as a mic and camera