I think that there are a number of people who’d be happy to keep their existing phones and still get their paws on the Touch.

U.S. users may not want to deal with the headaches and expense involved with breaking an existing contract, switching providers or living with AT&T’s current iPhone plan. Outside the U.S., there aren’t any mobile providers yet, and the yak-shaving involved with unlocking an iPhone is beyond what most customers want to deal with.

As for storage capacity, the iPhone trumps my reliable 4GB Nano, whose retail price was a mere $50 less than the 8GB Touch, and all the Nano does is play music (although I’ve used the stopwatch feature from time to time).

There’s also the issue of user experience, which played a role in the success of the original iPod, whose capacity seemed anemic compared to already-available MP3 players such as the Creative Nomad. What made the difference was that the Nomad (which we had at the OpenCola office because Cory’s an early adopter) was a pain in the ass to use while the iPod user experience was so much better.

Mind you, it’s a matter of perspective — I see the Touch as a web mini-tablet that happens to play movies and music as a bonus feature.

They absolutely should have released a hard-drive iPod Touch, something like 120 GB or 160 GB. As it is, 16 GB for $399? Why not just get the 8 GB iPhone for the same price?

I’ll go so far as to say the iPod Touch, as it currently exists sans hard drive, is a *mistake*.

I must say, giving people unlimited access to impulsive music purchasing power while hopped up on Venti caffeinated beverages is sheer marketing genius.