Apple, perhaps, is a bad example for the reason Pondy points out.

But the point in general stands, most people don't want to carry round multiple devices, especially not two that are near-identical in terms of features.


In other news, the Eels are amazing live.

largely=larger

See atrocious.

cab=can.

Damn my typing sucks atm.

Well that was partly in what I said

But the Touch comes in largely capacities too doesn't it?

For the touch and iphone I think we cab assume a fair amount of ibuyanythingfromapplesyndrome.

From what I can tell from visiting mac forums, there are quite a few users with the Touch, and the iPhone. Partially for the reason Pondlife said. Not to mention it the case of Apple the Touch cost less for more space(v. iPhone).

So you only have to deal with the one interface but have a music back up on your phone for when mp3 player battery goes. Cheaper than buying two phones.

Well hopefully.

You wouldn't buy a Touch if you had an iPhone though, would you?

So, if you have a high-end Android handset (which a number of people here either do or are looking at getting), why would you then buy a second device that gives you the same functionality sans the phone element?

It is partially the same reason why the Touch is doing well.

Not everyone wants a phone, so what's so hard for some of you to comprehend?

I don't see why you'd buy either of them over a Galaxy S (or one of it's sister devices).

Our news can be syndicated by using these rss feeds.