UPDATE: iPod Touch and Classic compared with predecessors: What got worse

As some of you have already noticed, Apple's new generation of iPods isn't much of a generational leap. And if you looks at the details, they're actually a step backward in some ways.

Follow: Our comparison chart for the iPod Classic shows the new model gets a 40GB bump to 160GB — a capacity it had previously enjoyed in 2007 — and its screen isn't as crisp as it was the previous generation, going from 480x320 to 320x240 pixels.

And that's not all. The iPod Touch took a similar step down. Click Continue to find out more.

UPDATE: After reviewing the specs for the first generation iPod Classic, we've found that we got its resolution wrong. Both the 1G and the 2G iPod Classic screen resolutions are the same, with no downgrade — as we reported — between the two. Errors of this on the site have been fixed.

The iPod Touch suffered a loss of about 15% of its battery life. Since it didn't get a fancy new camera as many thought it would, the culprit is most likely that faster processor it's packing. That, or something's changed with the battery architecture.

In fact, most of the iPod family has been bleeding away battery life lately. Back in '07, the 160GB Classic was rated for 40 hours and the Shuffle enjoyed 12. Now they're at 36 and 10, respectively. Only the Nano has shown improvement, adding one extra hour for video playback. To be fair those high 2007 numbers came after improvements in battery tech allowed for iPods that lasted almost twice as long as their '06 predecessors, and now we're seeing the modern iPod line doing more and, in turn, taxing the batteries more.

What do you think? Do these downgrades matter? Or is the answer simply, "What else are you going to buy?" Let us know, and you can see all of the new iPods (and iTunes!) compared to their predecessors here.