PDA

View Full Version : iPod Touch (a Touch OS X device)




Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Sep 6, 2007, 11:59 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

As the dust settles from yesterday's announcements, many are looking at the iPod Touch and imagining how far its capabilities can be pushed.

Gizmodo received (http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/breaking/ipod-touch-runs-same-applications-as-iphone-296837.php) word that (unsurprisingly) the iPod Touch runs exactly the same applications as the existing iPhone. According to their contact the iPhone and iPod Touch "use the same damn binaries".

This means that existing 3rd party iPhone applications should easily be installable on the iPod Touch. As well, there's no doubt that someone will try to move the iPhone's Mail application to the iPod Touch.

Apple's introduction of the iPod Touch extends their new Touch OS X platform into another iteration. Unfortunately, Apple has yet to officially open this platform up to 3rd party developers. Meanwhile, there have been major strides (http://iphone.nullriver.com/beta/) in unofficial efforts to bring 3rd party applications to the iPhone. Despite all their progress, without official support, users still have to deal with data loss possibilites with each official firmware update.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/09/06/ipod-touch-a-touch-os-x-device/)



EvanLugh
Sep 6, 2007, 12:01 PM
Didn't we know this already?

cbud
Sep 6, 2007, 12:03 PM
What a joke, how could it not have Mail? Very lame Apple, very lame!

likeavaliant
Sep 6, 2007, 12:03 PM
they need to open both touch devices up to developers asap.

Eidorian
Sep 6, 2007, 12:04 PM
SDK now.

FJ218700
Sep 6, 2007, 12:05 PM
What a joke, how could it not have Mail? Very lame Apple, very lame!

they were really rushed to get this sucker out. I'm sure by the 28th there will be a few more apps than were previewed

jaydub
Sep 6, 2007, 12:06 PM
What a joke, how could it not have Mail? Very lame Apple, very lame!I'm sure that Apple is strategically choosing what to put on the iPod touch. They've got to give people some incentive to step up to the iPhone, and if there are key features which only the iPhone has, they'll go for it.

xelphy
Sep 6, 2007, 12:06 PM
I AGREE. Give us the darn SDK. If it's not unveiled during the new OS rollout in Oct, then I don't know man, I just don't know.

Having my iPhone on a plane recently w/out internet is like having a brick w/out games or ANY apps... cmoooon

willybNL
Sep 6, 2007, 12:08 PM
So, who will install a SIP of VoIP client... and attach a microphone?

:):D

SupadudeX
Sep 6, 2007, 12:08 PM
Who else thinks that the iPod touch and the iPhone are exactly the same hardware with only a firmware change to disable features? I think its very likely. Its probably cheaper for apple to produce only one version of the hardware rather than redesign the thing. I know video card companies do this all the time. If this is so it leads to the possibility of unlocking the phone capabilities with some software/hardware modifications.

Dawg0381
Sep 6, 2007, 12:09 PM
Does this mean that the ipod touch will allow you to make entries on the Calendar application on the ipod. And then sync them back to your computer.....?

willybNL
Sep 6, 2007, 12:09 PM
Can anybody tell me: does it work with Cisco VPN connections? Lot's of universities work with this (mine too) to get on the WLAN.

mainstreetmark
Sep 6, 2007, 12:09 PM
What a joke, how could it not have Mail? Very lame Apple, very lame!

Well, I suspect Apple is deliberately leaving Mail off the iPodT (clearly, since it's not there now), leaving the iPod to be more entertainment and the iPhone to be more business.

But, since it has Safari, the standard "web2.0 application" excuse persists, and before long (and possibly already), someone will have a safari-ized webmail client

First time I ever saw a curse word on the homepage of MR.com

coumerelli
Sep 6, 2007, 12:09 PM
I'm sure that Apple is strategically choosing what to put on the iPod touch. They've got to give people some incentive to step up to the iPhone, and if there are key features which only the iPhone has, they'll go for it.

Waiting for the 16GB iPhone (Jan?) and then get a 160 GB iPod Classic to couple with it. One for phone/podcasts, etc and one for Most of my DVD/CD collection synced from the lappy.

All for, what? $749? $849?

Clive At Five
Sep 6, 2007, 12:10 PM
At first I was very upset about Mail, but then I realized I use gmail, which I can just get online. Still, it'd be nice to see on the home screen that I have new mail, without having to manually check.

But I do find it ridiculous that Apple left out all the web-apps except Safari. If you can find a hot-spot to browse Safari, you can find a hot-spot to check stock quotes and mail and whatnot.

Nonetheless, I'm confident that 3rd-party installs will then be possible and a Mail client will be installable, etc.

-Clive

mainstreetmark
Sep 6, 2007, 12:12 PM
Who else thinks that the iPod touch and the iPhone are exactly the same hardware with only a firmware change to disable features? I think its very likely. Its probably cheaper for apple to produce only one version of the hardware rather than redesign the thing. I know video card companies do this all the time. If this is so it leads to the possibility of unlocking the phone capabilities with some software/hardware modifications.

It's "similar", but i'm sure it's quite different. For one, the iPhone is both thinner and more capacitous. Also, the iPhone obviously has a hardware radio for the cellphone, a microphone, as well as sensors to turn off the display when it's at your ear.

The OS though, is exactly the same, I'm sure.

Nonetheless, I'm confident that 3rd-party installs will then be possible and a Mail client will be installable, etc.

*shudder* This may be THE reason we're not seeing, and will never see, a SDK for the iPhone platform. If Apple is truly triming apps to avoid iPhone market canibalization, they certainly wouldn't give us the tools to add them back in. :(

milo
Sep 6, 2007, 12:14 PM
You don't think apple might actually be planning on opening it up to third party apps once they're ready for it?

It's not like they haven't been busy you know, finishing these up, shipping them, working the bugs out, not to mention finishing A MAJOR REWRITE OF OSX. Plus, it wouldn't have made sense to release a SDK for the iPhone with the touch only a couple months behind.

People love to overreact, it's not realistic to expect something like third party support to be ready the first day the product ships.

CWallace
Sep 6, 2007, 12:14 PM
I expected hackers/modders would extend the iPod Touch's capabilities, which is why I was surprised Apple instilled so much of the functionality of the iPhone into it.

But hey, more power to them. The more iPhones (after the price cut) and iPod Touchs out there, the more incentive for folks to make cool apps for them.

transitman
Sep 6, 2007, 12:14 PM
Who else thinks that the iPod touch and the iPhone are exactly the same hardware with only a firmware change to disable features? I think its very likely. Its probably cheaper for apple to produce only one version of the hardware rather than redesign the thing. I know video card companies do this all the time. If this is so it leads to the possibility of unlocking the phone capabilities with some software/hardware modifications.

There is no microphone with it like the iPhone. This would be more work than it is worth. If you want an iPhone, just buy one. They are reasonably priced now. The real question is when will they create a CDMA version of the iPhone.

transitman
Sep 6, 2007, 12:16 PM
Does this mean that the ipod touch will allow you to make entries on the Calendar application on the ipod. And then sync them back to your computer.....?

I wish someone could answer this for me. If this and the Mail app is added, that would get me to buy one immediately.

SupadudeX
Sep 6, 2007, 12:17 PM
There is no microphone with it like the iPhone. This would be more work than it is worth. If you want an iPhone, just buy one. They are reasonably priced now. The real question is when will they create a CDMA version of the iPhone.

Are you sure theres no microphone? I dont know I havent looked too closely into it.

fastbite
Sep 6, 2007, 12:17 PM
Mail would be sweet. But as other people are saying here, we can check our mail through safari, but can we use the touch keyboard to create/ respond to that mail? I'm sorry if my question sounds naive or stupid, but I can't figured it out -- may need more coffee.

notjustjay
Sep 6, 2007, 12:18 PM
It's not like they haven't been busy you know, finishing these up, shipping them, working the bugs out, not to mention finishing A MAJOR REWRITE OF OSX. Plus, it wouldn't have made sense to release a SDK for the iPhone with the touch only a couple months behind.


This certainly better explains the Leopard delay. Back when it was announced that they were pulling people from Leopard to help finish up the iPhone, everyone was upset that Apple was putting so many resources into a product so peripherally related to their core businesses. (Sarcastic cries of "Apple makes computers? I thought all they made was that iPhone thing...") Now it makes more sense, as those developers were obviously not "just" working on the iPhone, but a whole embedded platform for devices. And who knows what else they've got up their sleeves?

dr_lha
Sep 6, 2007, 12:18 PM
they were really rushed to get this sucker out. I'm sure by the 28th there will be a few more apps than were previewed
Mail is already developed though (for the iPhone), I see no reason why they wouldn't show it if it was on the iPod Touch.

dr_lha
Sep 6, 2007, 12:19 PM
Are you sure theres no microphone? I dont know I havent looked too closely into it.
There isn't a microphone listed on the specs page. Shame really, because it would be nice for a dictaphone like application if nothing else.

benlee
Sep 6, 2007, 12:19 PM
I'm so excited about this product. Yeah it would be nice if it had a mail app but I dont think its lame to not include one. It is smart. They have to seperate the ipodT and iphone besides just the phone features. My question is: Could I buy a 8GB iphone, unlock it and use it like the iphone touch so that if i later decide to make the switch to AT&T i can?

j-a-x
Sep 6, 2007, 12:19 PM
If the touch had Mail, I'd buy one. I don't use webmail so a mail app is pretty important to me.

There would still be an incentive to buy the iPhone - the addition of the PHONE features!

Since I have a contract with tmobile, I can't really use the phone features though.

If the touch had mail capabilities, it would be very useful. I could travel without my laptop for example and use it in hotels/airports. Otherwise, it's not worth the extra money just to have a touch screen and be able to buy songs from a Starbucks.

Kedrik
Sep 6, 2007, 12:24 PM
I wish someone could answer this for me. If this and the Mail app is added, that would get me to buy one immediately.

This works on my i-phone.

My 4 Gig excessively overpriced, as it turns out, i-phone.

aLoC
Sep 6, 2007, 12:26 PM
Stop trying to hack the iPhone you naughty little monkeys! Vegetarians might try to install these apps.

araya
Sep 6, 2007, 12:32 PM
Just let me know when it can remote control iTunes via wi-fi.

Project
Sep 6, 2007, 12:33 PM
If the touch had Mail, I'd buy one. I don't use webmail so a mail app is pretty important to me.


I am now convinced that no matter what Apple do, they cant please everybody.

RoboCop001
Sep 6, 2007, 12:34 PM
Stop trying to hack the iPhone you naughty little monkeys! Vegetarians might try to install these apps.

Too late. I've already installed a vegetarian recipe finder. Also, I made it myself. It's called.... iVeg! Yes, that'll do.

BTW
Sep 6, 2007, 12:34 PM
SDK now.

Yes, now please!

It was very evident yesterday that Apple never intends to open-up the iPhone or iPod touch unless you're one of their closest buddies (e.g. Yahoo or Google).

Imagine if they did. Apple would look bad if another IM or email client hopped on board while they're still working on theirs (iPod touch doesn't have a mail client). Plus the 3rd party apps could take up valuable real estate that they'd want to use for deal similar to the Youtube one. I'm sure Apple gets some compensation for that advertisement of Youtube.

CWallace
Sep 6, 2007, 12:34 PM
I am now convinced that no matter what Apple do, they cant please everybody.

If they could, everybody would be using their products. ;)

PecanEater
Sep 6, 2007, 12:35 PM
My question is: Could I buy a 8GB iphone, unlock it and use it like the iphone touch so that if i later decide to make the switch to AT&T i can?

This is a good point. If you leave out the extra 8GB of memory, wouldn't it be better to get an unlocked iPhone with no AT&T service? You have the opportunity to have the phone later and you get Mail, etc and a camera. Everyone seems to be forgetting about the camera. Its not great but still useful. For $399 you get a 8GB iPod Touch + Mail, Google Maps, etc + Camera + microphone (potential VoIP, etc). No monthly AT&T costs... Isn't this the way to go?

benlee
Sep 6, 2007, 12:39 PM
apple really did release amazing products yesterday. too bad some had to ruin all the good news with their B-eye-chin and complaining.Congratulations Apple, you sure do know how to make some kick-ass stuff.








: 9-5-07 : Only time in the history of the world people have complained because something is cheaper than it was before.

BornAgainMac
Sep 6, 2007, 12:43 PM
The iPod touch doesn't have to be locked down like the iPhone if using Apple's reasoning. It is just a music player so perhaps it should be opened up. Then if it proves that the iPod is stable, then an argument could be made that they can open up the iPhone.

gugy
Sep 6, 2007, 12:44 PM
Waiting for the 16GB iPhone (Jan?)

I will be doing that. I think the 16gig could even come before Xmas.
It is always good to wait a bit for a new product after is released. It's a safe bet in terms of price reduction and bugs to be fix. I am glad I waited and waiting a bit more won't hurt.

Same applies for the iPod Touch. It will soon have more apps.

gkarris
Sep 6, 2007, 12:44 PM
I've been in the market for a new PDA.

It would be great if you can add calendar and contacts, also a mail and notes app.

Heck, why not iWork mobile for iPhone and iPod Touch? Read PDF's, Excel, Word, PowerPoints...

Heck, lets just start calling it the "iPod Newton"!!!

madmaxmedia
Sep 6, 2007, 12:44 PM
I don't think anyone here is being negative, some people would just love to have Mail, being that the Touch runs the same OS and has wifi.

I can't think of any reason why copying it over won't be easy, with minimal hacking required. I also want Notes, same story with that app.

I read somewhere that you can edit or create contacts on the Touch, but I don't know. Hopefully the Notes and Calendar apps are the same exact binaries as on the iPhone.

What I'm hoping for is that the Finder and TextEdit app development progresses, and we can get those on the Touch.

I'm personally gonna wait on ordering until some of these things are tried/confirmed. But I will likely end up buying one no matter what.

shawnce
Sep 6, 2007, 12:46 PM
SDK now.

SDK when it is fully baked please...

4God
Sep 6, 2007, 01:02 PM
I've been in the market for a new PDA.

It would be great if you can add calendar and contacts,.........

Doesn't it have calendar and contacts?

EagerDragon
Sep 6, 2007, 01:02 PM
What a joke, how could it not have Mail? Very lame Apple, very lame!

Would be nice, but not required, do other music players have email?
web mail works fine via the safary browser, no need to install an app unless you want "PUSH" mail.

mrzippy
Sep 6, 2007, 01:04 PM
I can't understand the missing mail app on the iPod touch, what is the most likely thing you would do in a WiFi hotspot, check you email!

Let's hope they add this feature, Mail and iChat in a WiFi hotspot would be cool!

jackc
Sep 6, 2007, 01:04 PM
This thing is going to have a great future, it's still early days!

O and A
Sep 6, 2007, 01:05 PM
I AGREE. Give us the darn SDK. If it's not unveiled during the new OS rollout in Oct, then I don't know man, I just don't know.

Having my iPhone on a plane recently w/out internet is like having a brick w/out games or ANY apps... cmoooon

what did u do before u had an iphone and u were on a plane?

Corrosive vinyl
Sep 6, 2007, 01:05 PM
this is great... its just like a scaled down version of the iphone... free and clear from AT&T. I think :apple: got upset at what happened between them and AT&T so they thought, "we already have the technology, lets just make a similar device without the phone so we don't have to deal with anyone except us and the chip manufacturers" plus with the wi-fi all you are missing is something most people already have, a phone.

mrzippy
Sep 6, 2007, 01:05 PM
Would be nice, but not required, do other music players have email?
web mail works fine via the safary browser, no need to install an app unless you want "PUSH" mail.

But that is not the best way to check you mail, do you use webmail on your desktop, I think not!

dernhelm
Sep 6, 2007, 01:05 PM
SDK when it is fully baked please...

Next WWDC.

That's my prediction.

There is no real reason why 3rd party apps would be a problem on an iPod Touch. All of SJ's concerns around 3rd party apps for the iPhone were related to the device being a PHONE. There is no reason why the iPod Touch couldn't be opened up.

miketcool
Sep 6, 2007, 01:06 PM
Time to tackle 3 things:

1) No microphone, its a good thing.
One of the greatest things the Apple has is third support. Including a microphone and shutting out a dozen vendors and their unique solutions, probably not a good idea. I like the selection anyways. If I want a mic Ill clip one of the options on my lapel. Wait for after the Leopard release for an SDK, third party support is always on its way.
3rd part VOIP would be killer, but you might as well have the radio hardware and the phone features to accompany it.

2) No mail, no biggie.
I'm sure Apple will be adding more features as they come. Perhaps there needs to be a better integration of data, considering the iPod has always been used to store files. This leads me to my last issue...

3) Home on iPod.
You will see Home on iPod as was originally introduced 2 years ago, roughly about the time of this technology development. See any coincidences? This rumor will come to fruition. The eye candy to accompany it and the interface could be really, really sweet. Of course so would more memory...

O and A
Sep 6, 2007, 01:06 PM
Who else thinks that the iPod touch and the iPhone are exactly the same hardware with only a firmware change to disable features? I think its very likely. Its probably cheaper for apple to produce only one version of the hardware rather than redesign the thing. I know video card companies do this all the time. If this is so it leads to the possibility of unlocking the phone capabilities with some software/hardware modifications.

umm no. its way thinner than iphone and its a waste of money and space to place all the extra components into the ipod touch.

mrzippy
Sep 6, 2007, 01:07 PM
I forgot about contacts, all the iPods have this.

And a calendar would be excellent, with notes to sync to iCal.

nologo
Sep 6, 2007, 01:09 PM
Doesn't it have calendar and contacts?

Chill people! The iPod Touch clearly does have Calendar and Contacts, else it'd have less functionality than a 3rd gen iPod!

iPod Touch
http://images.apple.com/home/2007/images/ipod_hero_touch_20070905.jpg

iPhone:
http://images.apple.com/home/2007/images/ipod_hero_iphone_20070905.jpg

The missing apps are stocks, weather, mail, SMS, and maps. Camera as well, but clearly that app won't work without a built-in camera that Apple has chosen to not include on the iPod Touch.

O and A
Sep 6, 2007, 01:10 PM
i wish it had speakers on it when showing friend youtube videos. that would have been nice.

EagerDragon
Sep 6, 2007, 01:10 PM
Mail would be sweet. But as other people are saying here, we can check our mail through safari, but can we use the touch keyboard to create/ respond to that mail? I'm sorry if my question sounds naive or stupid, but I can't figured it out -- may need more coffee.

You can use the keyboard to enter text in any web form field. If the web form sends emails then yes.

Chris F
Sep 6, 2007, 01:11 PM
I think there is no microphone on the iTouch for a very simple reason.

Apple knows damn well that if there is a mic sooner or later someone is going to make Skype or something similar work on the iTouch and uh oh... hey look its a wifi phone.

O and A
Sep 6, 2007, 01:12 PM
Time to tackle 3 things:

3) Home on iPod.
You will see Home on iPod as was originally introduced 2 years ago, roughly about the time of this technology development. See any coincidences? This rumor will come to fruition. The eye candy to accompany it and the interface could be really, really sweet. Of course so would more memory...

Home on ipod is a freature i've been waiting for since it first surfaced years ago. But 8GB and 16GB seem very prohibitive. This would definately be nice. Next year when 32GB becomes significantly cheaper, especially at the quantity apple orders nand chips, i think this will be very likely.

B. Hunter
Sep 6, 2007, 01:13 PM
It specifically says right here you can use the keyboard to enter calendar info and contacts.
http://www.apple.com/ipodtouch/features.html?feature=multitouch

bentley
Sep 6, 2007, 01:13 PM
But that is not the best way to check you mail, do you use webmail on your desktop, I think not!


I'd say that the average person is more likely to check hotmail, yahoo and GMail than have Outlook Express or Mail configured...

mrzippy
Sep 6, 2007, 01:15 PM
It specifically says right here you can use the keyboard to enter calendar info and contacts.
http://www.apple.com/ipodtouch/features.html?feature=multitouch

So it does, I missed that as it's hidden in a paragraph rather than being one of of the highlighted features. So mail is the main missing app then.

EagerDragon
Sep 6, 2007, 01:18 PM
Seems that as of now, Apple computers is back by a different name. Now all they make are "things" that run OSX. It it has a CPU, it is a computer. You can nickpick if you want, but it has a CPU, has memory, a storage system, input device, and has 1-3 output devices (wifi, screen, speaker).

You have Macs and other computer devices used for music and or phone.

They are computers.

nologo
Sep 6, 2007, 01:18 PM
I'd say that the average person is more likely to check hotmail, yahoo and GMail than have Outlook Express or Mail configured...

You can, however, set up the Mail client to check all of the above and have the app ping you when you get a wifi connection of new emails. A great feature to have included for sure.

dbwie
Sep 6, 2007, 01:18 PM
Well,

The iPod Touch cannot have a rogue 3rd party application that takes down AT + T's west coast network, which Jobs suggested as one reason for not having a 3rd party SDK for the iPhone. Thus... why not release a SDK for the iPod touch?

thugpoet22
Sep 6, 2007, 01:18 PM
Hey, i was just wondering do you think people will be able to AIM and Yahoo instant messenger? I also wish it had blue tooth so we could eventually use cord less head phones.

mrzippy
Sep 6, 2007, 01:19 PM
I'd say that the average person is more likely to check hotmail, yahoo and GMail than have Outlook Express or Mail configured...

Fair point I suppose, but apple is all about pushing it's own solutions ie. .Mac therefore I would excepect Mail to be there for that... Lets hope there is a 3rd party app or better still the iPhone app.

nemaslov
Sep 6, 2007, 01:21 PM
What a joke, how could it not have Mail? Very lame Apple, very lame!

Because it's a friggen iPod! Me, I just happy that made a 160GB iPod to hold tons of tunes. . "Its the Music stupid."

And before you get all offended: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_the_economy,_stupid

vitaflo
Sep 6, 2007, 01:21 PM
I think there is no microphone on the iTouch for a very simple reason.

Apple knows damn well that if there is a mic sooner or later someone is going to make Skype or something similar work on the iTouch and uh oh... hey look its a wifi phone.

Uh oh, that's exactly what I want! The faster I can get rid of my cell phone and switch to a full featured wifi phone the better. Apple has the tech (ipodT/iPhone) and the software (iChat) to do all of this already. They have an entire market segment they can create overnight with it. Something tells me it's their stupid agreement with ATT that's limiting them from pulling the trigger. :mad:

flir67
Sep 6, 2007, 01:22 PM
somebody build a skype application for the ipod touch and get a imic or something and you got the greatest wifi phone device yet.

DarthTreydor
Sep 6, 2007, 01:22 PM
i don't understand why people are complaining about the lack of apps on the ipod touch. it seems pretty obvious that within a couple weeks of them hitting the streets someone will have hacked them to put any apps you want on them.

i swear.. by reading this board you would think that apple had never done anything right in its entire history. sheesh..

B. Hunter
Sep 6, 2007, 01:22 PM
I have not bought an Apple product going on three years now.
Just waiting for my Powebook to give up, before buying a new laptop.

The iPod Touch does have my attention though.
I would like to know if I can use it at home using Airport Extreme?

Like others I see benefits of entering calendar & contact info.
But hopefully we will get an early Christamas present and they will make Mail available.

Stella
Sep 6, 2007, 01:24 PM
Because it's a friggen iPod!

There's no reason why Touch can't have email.. its the same platform.

Apple, could make the Touch into a well supported 3rd party dev device, and a killer one at that... and expand that on to the iPhone.

Sigh, but I doubt they will.. a huge opportunity lost.

EagerDragon
Sep 6, 2007, 01:26 PM
I can't understand the missing mail app on the iPod touch, what is the most likely thing you would do in a WiFi hotspot, check you email!

Let's hope they add this feature, Mail and iChat in a WiFi hotspot would be cool!

It is an iPod and a communicator, so I see your point. It is a mater of time before someone hacks it to do VOIP and then AT&T is in trouble.

Unless you are one of the ones objecting to switching to AT&T, why not get an iPhone and have all the capabilities in a single device?

Good bye Batman bright yellow utility belt for all my devices. One device to rule them all, one device to bind them .....

blashphemy
Sep 6, 2007, 01:31 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/1C28 Safari/419.3)

hmmm just wondering...

The iPod has always had Disk Mode, right? And seeing as how it would be a little hard to overload the ATT network when there is no cellular chip on the iPhone, wouldn't Disk Mode show everybody the exact Touch OS X operating system files and make it much easier to create apps for it? I mean seriously, who ever heard of a locked MP3 player?

Oh yeah and Disk Mode would probably be mucho easy to add apps to the iPodT... I don't think you guys have anything to worry about.

Cougarcat
Sep 6, 2007, 01:32 PM
Well,

The iPod Touch cannot have a rogue 3rd party application that takes down AT + T's west coast network, which Jobs suggested as one reason for not having a 3rd party SDK for the iPhone. Thus... why not release a SDK for the iPod touch?

Because it's the exact same OS. It would work with the iPhone as well. Everyone knows that excuse Steve gave was BS. There are plenty of smartphones with third party apps that do not take down entire networks.

fastbite
Sep 6, 2007, 01:32 PM
You can use the keyboard to enter text in any web form field. If the web form sends emails then yes.
Thanks EagerDragon -- then it looks pretty cool to me.
And by the way, about cosmetics: I love the design of the touch, I think it looks even more 'elegant' than the iPhone.

currentinterest
Sep 6, 2007, 01:34 PM
Even with VoIP on an iPod touch one would still need a cell phone. Thus, simply using mobile JaJah via Safari, which I do to call Asia quite successfully, allows one to use their cell for VoIP. (No economic interest here, just like the service.) In fact, I place it through my iPhone and talk at local, rather than international rates.

Schtumple
Sep 6, 2007, 01:37 PM
: 9-5-07 : Only time in the history of the world people have complained because something is cheaper than it was before.

Oh so very true, you pay the price for being early adopters, you got it before every other country on the planet, stop whining...

Mail on the iPodT will come within the next month, not from apple though...

I'm planning on an 8gb iPod touch, I'm not ready to give up my O2 ice phone, plus iPhones not out here....

CWallace
Sep 6, 2007, 01:39 PM
My question is: Could I buy a 8GB iphone, unlock it and use it like the iphone touch so that if i later decide to make the switch to AT&T i can?

Yes you can, but it requires some workarounds which have been well-documented in the iPhone community so a search should bring them all up.

matznentosh
Sep 6, 2007, 01:42 PM
Waiting for the 16GB iPhone (Jan?) and then get a 160 GB iPod Classic to couple with it. One for phone/podcasts, etc and one for Most of my DVD/CD collection synced from the lappy.

My daughter pointed out to me that her computer automatically accesses everyone's iTunes libraries in her dorm building (I'm an old fogey, no iPod or iPhone, I have to hear about this stuff second hand).

So would the wireless iPod Touch and the iPhone be able to do that too? if so, you wouldn't have to have such a big hard drive, the smaller flash would be fine, you wouldn't have to keep much on your iPod at all. It would just stream from your larger library, like the Apple TV does.

the Western zoo
Sep 6, 2007, 01:42 PM
I wish they would just turn the Touch into a fully operative PDA, with the posibility to install "books" (like a medicine "lexicon"), mail and notes...

walala
Sep 6, 2007, 01:45 PM
Can anybody tell me: does it work with Cisco VPN connections? Lot's of universities work with this (mine too) to get on the WLAN.

I'd like to know about this as well

JuicyGoo
Sep 6, 2007, 01:51 PM
Anyone figure out if it uses the same glass screen or a cheaper plastic alternative?

danny_w
Sep 6, 2007, 01:54 PM
I wish they would just turn the Touch into a fully operative PDA, with the posibility to install "books" (like a medicine "lexicon"), mail and notes...
Quite right. I would have my order in already if this were the case.

Marx55
Sep 6, 2007, 01:54 PM
3rd party applications to the iPhone or at least the iPod touch is a must. We need at least a Keynote and PowerPoint reader of native Keynote and Powerpoint files!!!

Payton
Sep 6, 2007, 01:55 PM
Anyone figure out if it uses the same glass screen or a cheaper plastic alternative?

It comes with a polishing cloth, so I'm assuming it's glass too. :)



Also, all this talk about Mail, Maps, Weather, etc... I can see why Apple would leave these off of the iPod touch, BUT where the hell is the notes app? I mean, sure they will probably add apps in the near future. But the notes app does not even use WiFi. I'd probably order one now if I could input notes.

Tampa Tom
Sep 6, 2007, 01:56 PM
I'm sure that Apple is strategically choosing what to put on the iPod touch. They've got to give people some incentive to step up to the iPhone, and if there are key features which only the iPhone has, they'll go for it.

Uh....a phone maybe?????

tribulation
Sep 6, 2007, 01:58 PM
People this is an Apple Rev A device. I would HIGHLY recommend not buying it unless you want to be ripped off.

Do you think Apple came up with this product, had it designed, manufactured, and tested all within the last 2 months since the iPhone debuted? Obviously not. It's no secret that Apple was obviously planning the price reduction from day one. There's no component price fluctuation that could even come close to making up $200 worth of parts that drop in price in 2 months. None.

Apple took a very shady route and voluntarily ripped all of the early iPhone adopters and BEST MARKETERS they could have ever wished for. Here's the thing::

This thing has a max hard disk of 16 GB. They already dropped the smaller iPhone with good reason after only 2 months. 16 GB isn't much more when compared to other ipod-ish devices available now. Check out the newest Archos model for example. Sure, the interface isn't as good, but the space is exponentially larger. There's no doubt that Apple will dump this rev A version within a couple months max [again] and release a bigger version. 2-3 months from now and the iPhone is due for an actual physical upgrade if they want to stay competitive. 16 GB for a music & video player is atrocious for near-2008.

What happens then? Well, you will be screwed and PO'd like the iPhone buyers here. And again I'm not talking about normal product evolution and a normal pricing fluctuation. Apple has shown its core users a disgusting side of their quest for money. Mr. Jobs already said there will be No refunds for iPhone buyers. So even if that wasn't part of their original plan, it surely got a massive amount of negative media attention, yet when he had the chance to fix it even a bit [come on, even a $25 iTunes gift card would have sent a goodwill message to their users], he flat out poops on your face.

I'm not saying in any shape or form that products can't evolve and be marketed greatly. I am positive that this is a marketing and management blunder of unheard proportions for Apple fans. If you buy now, you will be sorry. There is no question of that. :o

MrCrowbar
Sep 6, 2007, 02:04 PM
My daughter pointed out to me that her computer automatically accesses everyone's iTunes libraries in her dorm building (I'm an old fogey, no iPod or iPhone, I have to hear about this stuff second hand).

So would the wireless iPod Touch and the iPhone be able to do that too? if so, you wouldn't have to have such a big hard drive, the smaller flash would be fine, you wouldn't have to keep much on your iPod at all. It would just stream from your larger library, like the Apple TV does.

True. People can opt not to share their iTunes library (per default, it's not shared). I don't know whether the iPhone or iPod touch can do that too. I'm pretty sure thos devices can't share their own libraries, but it would indeed be cool if they could if they could browse remote libraries. However, this would require to have WI-FI on to listen to music. That drains the battery and radiates your genitals a little if you have the iPhone/Pod in your pocket all the time...

Sure, the hardware could do it, but Apple software tends to be rather simple.

It would be cool if iPhones and iPod Touches could share the library though. You browse the songs around you (looking like one big playlist) and if you like what you're hearing, you can buy it roght on the spot. Would be a great way to make you want new music. "Shuffle remote playlists" would be neat :)

WannaGoMac
Sep 6, 2007, 02:06 PM
How long until someone ports the iPhone mail app to the iPod Touch? I hope soon so the damn complainers stop whining about having to use web mail

jackc
Sep 6, 2007, 02:08 PM
I'm not saying in any shape or form that products can't evolve and be marketed greatly. I am positive that this is a marketing and management blunder of unheard proportions for Apple fans. If you buy now, you will be sorry. There is no question of that. :o

Unless you buy based on the actual product you're getting, and not on the comparison to the next update.

That said, I'm probably waiting for the next update, but some people want to have it now and are willing to pay the premium. Same for the iPhone.

WannaGoMac
Sep 6, 2007, 02:09 PM
People this is an Apple Rev A device. I would HIGHLY recommend not buying it unless you want to be ripped off.

Do you think Apple came up with this product, had it designed, manufactured, and tested all within the last 2 months since the iPhone debuted? Obviously not. It's no secret that Apple was obviously planning the price reduction from day one. There's no component price fluctuation that could even come close to making up $200 worth of parts that drop in price in 2 months. None.

Apple took a very shady route and voluntarily ripped all of the early iPhone adopters and BEST MARKETERS they could have ever wished for. Here's the thing::

This thing has a max hard disk of 16 GB. They already dropped the smaller iPhone with good reason after only 2 months. 16 GB isn't much more when compared to other ipod-ish devices available now. Check out the newest Archos model for example. Sure, the interface isn't as good, but the space is exponentially larger. There's no doubt that Apple will dump this rev A version within a couple months max [again] and release a bigger version. 2-3 months from now and the iPhone is due for an actual physical upgrade if they want to stay competitive. 16 GB for a music & video player is atrocious for near-2008.

What happens then? Well, you will be screwed and PO'd like the iPhone buyers here. And again I'm not talking about normal product evolution and a normal pricing fluctuation. Apple has shown its core users a disgusting side of their quest for money. Mr. Jobs already said there will be No refunds for iPhone buyers. So even if that wasn't part of their original plan, it surely got a massive amount of negative media attention, yet when he had the chance to fix it even a bit [come on, even a $25 iTunes gift card would have sent a goodwill message to their users], he flat out poops on your face.

I'm not saying in any shape or form that products can't evolve and be marketed greatly. I am positive that this is a marketing and management blunder of unheard proportions for Apple fans. If you buy now, you will be sorry. There is no question of that. :o

ooh, so you're saying that in a few months a more improved model will come out! No way! :rolleyes: You mean technology keeps moving forward! Wow!!! :rolleyes:

Why does everyone say iPhone owners were screwed?? No they weren't, just unlucky. They thought the iPhone was worth $X, and paid it. What is the big ******** deal. Price reductions happen every day with technology. No one whines when Dell/Sony/Nokia lowers their prices every 1-2 months.

Unspeaked
Sep 6, 2007, 02:09 PM
So what's hardware the iPhone has that the iPod Touch doesn't?

1. Camera
2. Microphone
3. SIM Card Slot
4. Motion Sensor

Is there anything I'm missing?

danny_w
Sep 6, 2007, 02:10 PM
I haven't really been keeping up with the iPhone that much since I didn't intend to get one, but if the iPod Touch does not have an email client (and whatever else) then it might make sense to get a refurb iPhone and simply activate the iPod features. Does the syncing and all other features still work as normal if you do this? It might be worth the extra $50 to some, and you still have the option of activating the phone if you want to. Of course, you are limited to 8GB instead of 16GB.

Mr. Zarniwoop
Sep 6, 2007, 02:17 PM
So what's hardware the iPhone has that the iPod Touch doesn't?

1. Camera
2. Microphone
3. SIM Card Slot
4. Motion Sensor

Is there anything I'm missing?
5. Speaker
6. Proximity Sensor (turns off screen if close to face)
7. Bluetooth

Oh, and oh yeah... the transceiver in a CELLULAR PHONE. :)

penguy
Sep 6, 2007, 02:19 PM
ooh, so you're saying that in a few months a more improved model will come out! No way! :rolleyes: You mean technology keeps moving forward! Wow!!! :rolleyes:

Why does everyone say iPhone owners were screwed?? No they weren't, just unlucky. They thought the iPhone was worth $X, and paid it. What is the big ******** deal. Price reductions happen every day with technology. No one whines when Dell/Sony/Nokia lowers their prices every 1-2 months.

you are correct, to a point. Apple does NOT normally do this, however. Point to ONE item where they have. I've seen upgrades for the same price, or similar features with some aspect downgraded (say iMac using Intel 950 for students in lieu of ATI for less $$).

stockcerts
Sep 6, 2007, 02:21 PM
How many places could you actually use Safari and a mail app on the new Ipod? You would have to make a point of being in a hot spot, Star Bucks, airport, or pulling in a signal from your home network. I still see this device as an Ipod, a device primarily for listening to music.

Unspeaked
Sep 6, 2007, 02:22 PM
5. Speaker
6. Proximity Sensor (turns off screen if close to face)
7. Bluetooth

Oh, and oh yeah... the transceiver in a CELLULAR PHONE. :)

Ah, didn't realize there was a dfifference between the motion sensor and the proximity sensor - and totally forgot about bluetooth!

So we've got:

1. Camera
2. Microphone
3. SIM Card Slot
4. Motion Sensor
5. Proximity Sensor
6. Bluetooth
7. Speaker
8. Cellular Transceiver

Hmmm... how much you figure that stuff runs? Makes you think the iPod Touch could be about $100 less, even with the larger flash drive!

tribulation
Sep 6, 2007, 02:25 PM
ooh, so you're saying that in a few months a more improved model will come out! No way! :rolleyes: You mean technology keeps moving forward! Wow!!! :rolleyes:

Why does everyone say iPhone owners were screwed?? No they weren't, just unlucky. They thought the iPhone was worth $X, and paid it. What is the big ******** deal. Price reductions happen every day with technology. No one whines when Dell/Sony/Nokia lowers their prices every 1-2 months.

Yes I am saying that. The just released 16gb model is a hacked together version of the iphone. When the iPhone gets updated, it will inherit the guts. When will the iPhone's specs most likely have to be updated to stay relevant in the cell market? Within a few months. Which means the just released ipod touch will be updated almost certainly alongside.

I'll be they learned a lesson this time about pricing, yes Apple still has much to learn. So they will probably keep the price the same but with 2x or more the specs. Which would you want?

stockcerts
Sep 6, 2007, 02:28 PM
Here is an interesting perspective.

http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/hughes/18066

winterspan
Sep 6, 2007, 02:31 PM
But that is not the best way to check you mail, do you use webmail on your desktop, I think not!

Yes, I switched over to Gmail from Outlook and never looked back.
Yes, Mail would be nice, but again as people already stated, its part of differentiating the Touch from iPhone.

My God, APPLE RELEASES INCREDIBLE PRODUCTS YESTERDAY, WITH HUGE PRICE REDUCTIONS TO BOOT! And all you guys DO IS BITCH AND MOAN!

Get over yourself --- If you want it, Buy it! Otherwise ****!

- SW

WannaGoMac
Sep 6, 2007, 02:39 PM
you are correct, to a point. Apple does NOT normally do this, however. Point to ONE item where they have. I've seen upgrades for the same price, or similar features with some aspect downgraded (say iMac using Intel 950 for students in lieu of ATI for less $$).

Apple is not the company it used to be obviously.

The cell market will not tolerate the ass reaming Apple gives with it's high prices on old technology (Apple Tax).

The fact is the iPhone was NOT selling very well at the prior price once the initial fans had all bought it. If Apple were satisfied with the sales pace do you really think they would have lowered the prices? No way in hell. Face it, Apple had to lower the price to continue sales momentum.

I saw the unit for the first time earlier this week. My first thought, neat phone but to me it was not $600 of phone.

shlauncha
Sep 6, 2007, 02:47 PM
People this is an Apple Rev A device. I would HIGHLY recommend not buying it unless you want to be ripped off.

Do you think Apple came up with this product, had it designed, manufactured, and tested all within the last 2 months since the iPhone debuted? Obviously not. It's no secret that Apple was obviously planning the price reduction from day one. There's no component price fluctuation that could even come close to making up $200 worth of parts that drop in price in 2 months. None.

Apple took a very shady route and voluntarily ripped all of the early iPhone adopters and BEST MARKETERS they could have ever wished for. Here's the thing::

This thing has a max hard disk of 16 GB. They already dropped the smaller iPhone with good reason after only 2 months. 16 GB isn't much more when compared to other ipod-ish devices available now. Check out the newest Archos model for example. Sure, the interface isn't as good, but the space is exponentially larger. There's no doubt that Apple will dump this rev A version within a couple months max [again] and release a bigger version. 2-3 months from now and the iPhone is due for an actual physical upgrade if they want to stay competitive. 16 GB for a music & video player is atrocious for near-2008.

What happens then? Well, you will be screwed and PO'd like the iPhone buyers here. And again I'm not talking about normal product evolution and a normal pricing fluctuation. Apple has shown its core users a disgusting side of their quest for money. Mr. Jobs already said there will be No refunds for iPhone buyers. So even if that wasn't part of their original plan, it surely got a massive amount of negative media attention, yet when he had the chance to fix it even a bit [come on, even a $25 iTunes gift card would have sent a goodwill message to their users], he flat out poops on your face.

I'm not saying in any shape or form that products can't evolve and be marketed greatly. I am positive that this is a marketing and management blunder of unheard proportions for Apple fans. If you buy now, you will be sorry. There is no question of that. :o

http://www.apple.com/hotnews/openiphoneletter/

tribulation
Sep 6, 2007, 02:49 PM
http://www.apple.com/hotnews/openiphoneletter/

Thanks for the link.
VERY wise Mr. Jobs.

See, it does indeed pay to be loud ;)

cliffjumper68
Sep 6, 2007, 02:56 PM
I'm sure that Apple is strategically choosing what to put on the iPod touch. They've got to give people some incentive to step up to the iPhone, and if there are key features which only the iPhone has, they'll go for it.

iphone minus att equals itouch, which should remove the worst part of the iphone... att. Now I want one :D:apple:

ksolano
Sep 6, 2007, 02:58 PM
i like the idea of a iTouch app store within iTunes..
People get to pick and choose between the different apps from apple, (along with iphone users)

Think we'll see the iphone aps and others coming being sold to us?

cliffjumper68
Sep 6, 2007, 03:01 PM
My daughter pointed out to me that her computer automatically accesses everyone's iTunes libraries in her dorm building (I'm an old fogey, no iPod or iPhone, I have to hear about this stuff second hand).

So would the wireless iPod Touch and the iPhone be able to do that too? if so, you wouldn't have to have such a big hard drive, the smaller flash would be fine, you wouldn't have to keep much on your iPod at all. It would just stream from your larger library, like the Apple TV does.

Makes the find my mac app Jobs displayed as a part of Leopard more interesting. If you could access across wi-fi then memory size would not be as important. Improve battery life and size constraints.

madmaxmedia
Sep 6, 2007, 03:17 PM
Quite right. I would have my order in already if this were the case.

There is a book reader app already for the iPhone, which I'm sure will run sooner than later on the Touch-

http://code.google.com/p/iphoneebooks/

Format support is somewhat limited, but I'm sure will gradually improve.

madmaxmedia
Sep 6, 2007, 03:18 PM
The iPod Touch has the motion sensor, that's what allows it to rotate the screen when you rotate the iPod.

Ah, didn't realize there was a dfifference between the motion sensor and the proximity sensor - and totally forgot about bluetooth!

philoscoffee
Sep 6, 2007, 03:26 PM
Sorry to harp on about it, but the big advantage of a built-in Mail client over Safari is that it allows you to compose messages while you're offline, which can then be sent next time you connect via Wi-Fi. This would be a major plus point, and the necessary software already exists within the iPhone, so why not include it?

I'm not at all convinced that this is necessary for product differentiation, since the iPhone is a phone (surprise!) and the iPod touch isn't -- what more differentiation do you need?! Perhaps we can persuade Apple to reconsider their decision to omit the Mail app before the shipping date. I mean, I know it's supposed to be a music player, but why stop there? ;)

stockcerts
Sep 6, 2007, 03:28 PM
What is the shipping date?

madmaxmedia
Sep 6, 2007, 03:31 PM
I'm not at all convinced that this is necessary for product differentiation, since the iPhone is a phone (surprise!) and the iPod touch isn't -- what more differentiation do you need?! Perhaps we can persuade Apple to reconsider their decision to omit the Mail app before the shipping date. I mean, I know it's supposed to be a music player, but why stop there? ;)

I would say that the chance that it can be copied over with minimal hacks is like 99%, along with the other apps.

I'm not going to order until later since they're not shipping yet anyway. If its 100% critical that you get Mail, then just wait a few days after its available, until other people get the Touches first. Copying over Mail is gonna be one of the first things people try to do.

WannaGoMac
Sep 6, 2007, 03:32 PM
Sorry to harp on about it, but the big advantage of a built-in Mail client over Safari is that it allows you to compose messages while you're offline, which can then be sent next time you connect via Wi-Fi. This would be a major plus point, and the necessary software already exists within the iPhone, so why not include it?

I'm not at all convinced that this is necessary for product differentiation, since the iPhone is a phone (surprise!) and the iPod touch isn't -- what more differentiation do you need?! Perhaps we can persuade Apple to reconsider their decision to omit the Mail app before the shipping date. I mean, I know it's supposed to be a music player, but why stop there? ;)


Dont worry. They will get mail.app ported over somehow...

winterspan
Sep 6, 2007, 03:34 PM
People this is an Apple Rev A device. I would HIGHLY recommend not buying it unless you want to be ripped off.
Do you think Apple came up with this product, had it designed, manufactured, and tested all within the last 2 months since the iPhone debuted? Obviously not. It's no secret that Apple was obviously planning the price reduction from day one. There's no component price fluctuation that could even come close to making up $200 worth of parts that drop in price in 2 months. None.


First of all, NO ONE WAS RIPPED OFF. THEY CHOSE TO BUY IT AT THE PRICE THEY PAID. No one is claiming that price reductions in components caused the drop in the iPhone price. And YES, OBVIOUSLY they had a price reduction planned since day one. It's called spending millions of dollars on development of a new product for an entirely new market with untested technology, untested consumer response, etc etc etc. The reason ALL CELLPHONES start off with a large price premium is to recoup some of that initial production cost at the critical time when they do not know if the product will become a success or not. Most early adopters know this and deal with it. It has nothing to do with Apple being evil or greedy, it is standard text-book business practice. This is why my Razr cellphone I paid over $350 for only 18 months ago is now selling for under $100.


Apple took a very shady route and voluntarily ripped all of the early iPhone adopters and BEST MARKETERS they could have ever wished for.


Again, Apple did NOTHING shady and they didn't rip anyone off. I am so sick of STUPID AMERICANS ALWAYS BLAMING EVERYONE ELSE BUT THEMSELVES.
It is this type of unwarranted lack of self-responsibility that continually reduces my patriotism. ;)


Here's the thing:
This thing has a max hard disk of 16 GB. They already dropped the smaller iPhone with good reason after only 2 months. 16 GB isn't much more when compared to other ipod-ish devices available now. Check out the newest Archos model for example. Sure, the interface isn't as good, but the space is exponentially larger. There's no doubt that Apple will dump this rev A version within a couple months max [again] and release a bigger version. 2-3 months from now and the iPhone is due for an actual physical upgrade if they want to stay competitive. 16 GB for a music & video player is atrocious for near-2008.

JEEZ ... ITS FLASH MEMORY! I doubt Archos has 128 GIGS of NAND flash in their device. And if Apple did, the device would cost a fortune! and then you'd be moaning about the price. And don't even say they should have a put a 1.8" HDD in the device. The whole concept of the iPhone/Ipod Touch is the ultra-responsive gorgeous interface, lightweight and ultra-thing design. Plus the battery life. All these aspects would be much more compromised by sticking a clunky spinning disk in there.


What happens then? Well, you will be screwed and PO'd like the iPhone buyers here. And again I'm not talking about normal product evolution and a normal pricing fluctuation. Apple has shown its core users a disgusting side of their quest for money. Mr. Jobs already said there will be No refunds for iPhone buyers. So even if that wasn't part of their original plan, it surely got a massive amount of negative media attention, yet when he had the chance to fix it even a bit [come on, even a $25 iTunes gift card would have sent a goodwill message to their users], he flat out poops on your face.

I'm not saying in any shape or form that products can't evolve and be marketed greatly. I am positive that this is a marketing and management blunder of unheard proportions for Apple fans. If you buy now, you will be sorry. There is no question of that. :o

Wrong, I will buy "now" and there is no question I WON'T BE SORRY.
I'm getting just the device I wanted: An iPhone without the phone features for an excellent price. And Even one with DOUBLE THE MEMORY of the best iPhone. It still amazes me how much people can bi*ch and moan on here.
An outsider reading this forums would think Apple is the worst company on the planet.

Go buy an iPhone and GET OVER IT!

hatcher146
Sep 6, 2007, 03:45 PM
i love thew new iPod touch it has everything i want.....

i have a question though...

do you think more apps (real ones) will be added to the "home screen"....it just looks too empty compared to the iPhone...i know i know...the iPhone has more...but do you think apple will introduce anymore new apps for it? anything from iChat? or any other applications?

winterspan
Sep 6, 2007, 03:49 PM
i love thew new iPod touch it has everything i want.....

i have a question though...

do you think more apps (real ones) will be added to the "home screen"....it just looks too empty compared to the iPhone...i know i know...the iPhone has more...but do you think apple will introduce anymore new apps for it? anything from iChat? or any other applications?

Yes, I think they will definitely be adding more apps, maybe even an Itunes "App" section like the games for the ipod. This is obviously easily done, and I see no reason why not.

gadgetgirl85
Sep 6, 2007, 03:49 PM
i love thew new iPod touch it has everything i want.....

i have a question though...

do you think more apps (real ones) will be added to the "home screen"....it just looks too empty compared to the iPhone...i know i know...the iPhone has more...but do you think apple will introduce anymore new apps for it? anything from iChat? or any other applications?

I"m thinking that more apps might be added in the future too.......the screen does appear like its missing a few things that may come down the track

Ted Witcher
Sep 6, 2007, 03:54 PM
Question: Is there a playlist-on-the-go feature on iPhone/Touch? You know, so you can load up a bunch of songs to play? I know you can do it from your home computer, obviously, but that's no good in the car later on or at the spontaneous get-together. The one-at-a-time nature of the iPod always seemed a little clunky. And with multitouch, this seems like a no-brainer function (that actually adds useful functionality). Surely someone has thought of this.

Nayrb
Sep 6, 2007, 03:54 PM
To me the empty home screen just screams "hack me and add apps" &/or Apple has much more planned for the iPhone and iPod touch.

I'd really like to see notes added to the touch, just seems like it would be a easy way to take down assignments while you're rushing out of class off to lunch or to the other side of campus where your next class is.

CWallace
Sep 6, 2007, 04:05 PM
I'd like to know about (the iPod Touch working with Cisco VPNs) as well...

It might. We have Cisco WiFi here at work, but we lock it down something fierce (until recently you had to use CISCO PCMCIA Wireless cards) with EAP-FAST and such that my iPhone does not support, so I can't connect.

However, my experience with VPN is that you need a client (either built-in or third party) and I am not sure the iPhone/iPod Touch has that...



People this is an Apple Rev A device.

Yes, same as the iPhone on which it is based.


This thing has a max hard disk of 16 GB...16 GB isn't much more when compared to other ipod-ish devices available now.

Because 16MB is about the maximum amount you can put in and maintain a "reasonable" price-point that appeals to enough people to make the RoI worth it.


Check out the newest Archos model for example. Sure, the interface isn't as good, but the space is exponentially larger.

The capacity isn't the only thing that is larger on it... To fit the HDD and the larger battery to keep it alive for hours the entire form factor and weight is larger then the iPod Touch.


The fact is the iPhone was NOT selling very well at the prior price once the initial fans had all bought it. If Apple were satisfied with the sales pace do you really think they would have lowered the prices? No way in hell. Face it, Apple had to lower the price to continue sales momentum.

Almost one million units moved 60 days after product launch is not something to sneeze at.

I really think what drove the iPhone's price down was a desire not to stuff the iPod Touch with 32GB or even 64GB of flash which would have pushed prices to $599 or even more. Right now, folks are thinking "gee, for the same price I should get an iPhone" at $399. I bet at $599 for a 32GB iPod Touch they'd think the same, and really think it at $799 for a 64GB Model. And they'd still carp that 32GB/64GB was too little storage capacity. :p

So with the iPod Touch at 16GB and a $299/$399 price to keep it competitive with other 16GB PMPs on the market, that meant a $200/$300 gap to the iPhone, which while offering more features and functionality, does so at a hefty premium. Plus the iPhone itself was soon to be under threat from cheaper advanced cellphones and Windows Mobile 6 Smartphones.

So Apple had to cut the iPhone's price...

CWallace
Sep 6, 2007, 04:06 PM
Question: Is there a playlist-on-the-go feature on iPhone/Touch?

Yes. My iPhone has it.

hatcher146
Sep 6, 2007, 04:07 PM
good thing. i really am hoping they add more apps. i mean NOTES. come on. that has to be on there. i just hope they add a few more. i love the touch iPod its just so....sexy and i dunno. and it has safari and youtube. im very happy about those. so many people are complaining about it. get over it and get the classic. i love the touch iPod. but the 200$ iPhone price drop is very convincing. i love that. but i think im still going to go for the touch. when do you think apple will release a higher storage iPhone rev b. iPhone?

Ted Witcher
Sep 6, 2007, 04:08 PM
Yes. My iPhone has it.

Really. That's excellent. I haven't seen that in any of the videos. I wonder if Touch has it as well.

WannaGoMac
Sep 6, 2007, 04:08 PM
Almost one million units moved 60 days after product launch is not something to sneeze at.

I really think what drove the iPhone's price down was a desire not to stuff the iPod Touch with 32GB or even 64GB of flash which would have pushed prices to $599 or even more. Right now, folks are thinking "gee, for the same price I should get an iPhone" at $399. I bet at $599 for a 32GB iPod Touch they'd think the same, and really think it at $799 for a 64GB Model. And they'd still carp that 32GB/64GB was too little storage capacity. :p

So with the iPod Touch at 16GB and a $299/$399 price to keep it competitive with other 16GB PMPs on the market, that meant a $200/$300 gap to the iPhone, which while offering more features and functionality, does so at a hefty premium. Plus the iPhone itself was soon to be under threat from cheaper advanced cellphones and Windows Mobile 6 Smartphones.

So Apple had to cut the iPhone's price...

I wasn't sneezing at the iPhone sales. However, it is not near 1 million sold in 60 days. Not sure where you're getting that as SJ said yesterday they were on track for the end of September. But no definites.

again, they would not lower the price if they didn't have to... why would they walk away from $200 more profit unless they had to?

I think it is a great sign of change at apple. Maybe they will stop selling old hardware for current prices (i.e. refresh more than 1x a year on the macs!!)

twoodcc
Sep 6, 2007, 04:11 PM
they were really rushed to get this sucker out. I'm sure by the 28th there will be a few more apps than were previewed

i hope you are right about that!

danny_w
Sep 6, 2007, 04:12 PM
Really. That's excellent. I haven't seen that in any of the videos. I wonder if Touch has it as well.
I would imagine so, since a regular iPod has it too. Certainly they wouldn't leave out a standard iPod feature.

madmaxmedia
Sep 6, 2007, 04:13 PM
good thing. i really am hoping they add more apps. i mean NOTES. come on. that has to be on there. i just hope they add a few more. i love the touch iPod its just so....sexy and i dunno. and it has safari and youtube. im very happy about those. so many people are complaining about it. get over it and get the classic. i love the touch iPod. but the 200$ iPhone price drop is very convincing. i love that. but i think im still going to go for the touch. when do you think apple will release a higher storage iPhone rev b. iPhone?

On Friday, they are going to announce that the $399 iPhone is bumped to 16GB. Then they'll give away free iPod Shuffles to everyone who bought a $399 8GB iPhone in the last 2 days, to make up for it. ;)

Ted Witcher
Sep 6, 2007, 04:15 PM
Okay, now I am officially the biggest idiot around. I have a video iPod and have no idea how to operate the playlist-on-the-go function (meaning I can make a playlist from the iPod itself). Could someone please quickly enlighten me?

mrzippy
Sep 6, 2007, 04:25 PM
Fair point I suppose, but apple is all about pushing it's own solutions ie. .Mac therefore I would excepect Mail to be there for that... Lets hope there is a 3rd party app or better still the iPhone app.

I just thought about your comment, and surly the average user doesn't have a WiFi hotspot account or maybe even knowledge of their existence. This would of course back the reason why it doesn't have the app, but then it negates the web browser too!

danny_w
Sep 6, 2007, 04:29 PM
Okay, now I am officially the biggest idiot around. I have a video iPod and have no idea how to operate the playlist-on-the-go function (meaning I can make a playlist from the iPod itself). Could someone please quickly enlighten me?
Although I've never used it, I found how to do it. Highlight a song, artist, genre, or playlist and press the center button for 3 seconds until the title flashes. This will save it to the on-the-go playlist. To save the playlist, select the playlist and select 'Save Playlist'.

Ted Witcher
Sep 6, 2007, 04:40 PM
Got it, thanks. I'm an idiot. Six years and I had no idea.

madmaxmedia
Sep 6, 2007, 04:42 PM
Got it, thanks. I'm an idiot. Six years and I had no idea.

LOL, it's a pretty nice feature too. Consider it like you just got a cool firmware upgrade-

CWallace
Sep 6, 2007, 04:44 PM
Again, they would not lower the price if they didn't have to... why would they walk away from $200 more profit unless they had to?

Get a jump on future products with similar features and lock-in users now?

Lots of companies are planning "iPhone-type" products based on the success of the iPhone itself. By knocking the price down now, you get more of those folks to buy iPhones now and deny those sales to your competitors later, especially since cellphone contracts (in the US) are neither easy or cheap to break. So even if Nokia comes out in December with a $599 128GB flash GSM cellphone with a 4" touchscreen that "only" works with T-Mobile on a two year contract, precious few of those iPhone buyers are going to scap their $400 phones plus the cancellation fee to AT&T to then buy the Nokia phone and enter into a two year contract with them. But if those users were on the fence about the iPhone because of the $599 price and had not yet committed, the second Nokia comes out with that phone, they're gonna land almost every single sale and eschew the iPhone. And even if Apple then dropped the iPhone's price to $299, most would still eschew the iPhone because the Nokia offered so much more.

Now yes, I'm using a (likely) extreme example here, but even if the other companies just match the iPhone's capabilities and functionality at a similar (or even cheaper) price point (then $599), that's going to deny Apple some sales.


I think it is a great sign of change at apple. Maybe they will stop selling old hardware for current prices (i.e. refresh more than 1x a year on the macs!!)

I prefer the stability of Apple's hardware releases, but that's because Apple tends not to "low-ball config" their products to meet a low price point and therefore said equipment does not obsolesce nearly as fast.

emotion
Sep 6, 2007, 05:00 PM
I'm looking forward to see where this takes us. Very promising indeed.

I'm a little put off by the lack of a2dp on iphone with bluetooth (for stereo headphone support) but at least there's a chance it can happen. If there's no BT then no chance. Shame, for an iPod that's a major omission.

Possibly to stop people making it a wi-fi phone.

aswitcher
Sep 6, 2007, 05:04 PM
The german site had a BT icon near the battery. I wonder that by the end of the month the iTouch will officially get BT and a few other Apps (Notes?). Else they wont see BT enabled after release because of Sarbanes-Oxley.

winterspan
Sep 6, 2007, 05:05 PM
... and surly the average user doesn't have a WiFi hotspot account or maybe even knowledge of their existence...

SAY WHAT? The average user doesn't have knowledge of the existence of Wifi hotspots? Do you know how many households have a home WLAN network? I would guess > 95% of the "average users" of an Ipod touch/Iphone indeed understands the concept and intends to use a Wifi hotspot for net access.

Unless of course you are positing that said users don't know of the existence of CERTAIN hotspots and their location --- well in that case you just weren't being very clear about it :)

emotion
Sep 6, 2007, 05:06 PM
The german site had a BT icon near the battery. I wonder that by the end of the month the iTouch will officially get BT and a few other Apps (Notes?). Else they wont see BT enabled after release because of Sarbanes-Oxley.

We need someone to take a Touch apart and find out what the situation is :).

3 weeks to go.

Strangely to some people it's so close between an iPhone (depending on O2's deal and it being 16GB) and a Touch for me that BT is a feature that could swing it for me.

rsalamun6147
Sep 6, 2007, 05:08 PM
I am interested in a new Itouch but I'm concerned on the itouch internet using safari, in that I am a current macbook user wuth internet connection as of present day and time, I have charter highspeed internet wifi, question is this when you buy the new iTouch in that you have to sign up for internet service again or you can connect to your existing internet provider? Someone please let me know. thanx, robert

onionperson654
Sep 6, 2007, 05:08 PM
Ah, didn't realize there was a dfifference between the motion sensor and the proximity sensor - and totally forgot about bluetooth!

So we've got:

1. Camera
2. Microphone
3. SIM Card Slot
4. Motion Sensor
5. Proximity Sensor
6. Bluetooth
7. Speaker
8. Cellular Transceiver

Hmmm... how much you figure that stuff runs? Makes you think the iPod Touch could be about $100 less, even with the larger flash drive!


One extra thing that appears trivial at first, but suggests significant manufacturing differences between the iPhone and iPod Touch:
--While they both have a 480x320 screen, the iphone is 160 pixels per inch while the iPod touch is 163 pixels per inch.

Obviously, they use different parts for the screen as well as the body and everything listed above. In fact, there is probably more different hardware than there is similar between the two devices.

emotion
Sep 6, 2007, 05:13 PM
One extra thing that appears trivial at first, but suggests significant manufacturing differences between the iPhone and iPod Touch:
--While they both have a 480x320 screen, the iphone is 160 pixels per inch while the iPod touch is 163 pixels per inch.

Obviously, they use different parts for the screen as well as the body and everything listed above. In fact, there is probably more different hardware than there is similar between the two devices.

There's got to be an element of subsidization on a 399 iPhone I'd say. At least at this point. As it gets older it'll get cheaper to make.

mrzippy
Sep 6, 2007, 05:14 PM
SAY WHAT? The average user doesn't have knowledge of the existence of Wifi hotspots? Do you know how many households have a home WLAN network? I would guess > 95% of the "average users" of an Ipod touch/Iphone indeed understands the concept and intends to use a Wifi hotspot for net access.

Unless of course you are positing that said users don't know of the existence of CERTAIN hotspots and their location --- well in that case you just weren't being very clear about it :)

That is what I meant in part yes, but also my wife for example, she knows about WiFi but if she got an iPod touch (which she wants) it's because it's cool and I doubt she'd ever even turn the WiFi on let alone pay for access away from home.

dicklacara
Sep 6, 2007, 05:19 PM
again, they would not lower the price if they didn't have to... why would they walk away from $200 more profit unless they had to?

I think the main reason Apple slashed the iPhone price, was just what SJ said it was-- an aggressive move to garner a large(r) share of the phone market... the entire phone market, not just the smart phone segment. Doing this now, instead of, say, Jan-Feb, gives great sales potential for the holiday season and the business budget cycle for the new year.

Apple risks some early-adapter dissatisfaction (since mitigated) and some "told-you-it-wouldn't-sell-at-that-price" ridicule...

in return Apple gets a fantastic opportunity to gain a significant share of the market, larger customer base, and earlier profits/ROI.

The opportunity is there... the time is now... great move!

Wm Shakespeare said it best:

"There is a tide in the affairs of men, Which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune. Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries. On such a full sea are we now afloat. And we must take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures. "

cliffjumper68
Sep 6, 2007, 05:20 PM
That is what I meant in part yes, but also my wife for example, she knows about WiFi but if she got an iPod touch (which she wants) it's because it's cool and I doubt she'd ever even turn the WiFi on let alone pay for access away from home.

Not when crackbucks ahh starbucks is partnered with a unique music store application. Everytime i go in there (ok every morning) it is full of laptops, and ladies talking and looking at the cd's they sell.

emotion
Sep 6, 2007, 05:21 PM
That is what I meant in part yes, but also my wife for example, she knows about WiFi but if she got an iPod touch (which she wants) it's because it's cool and I doubt she'd ever even turn the WiFi on let alone pay for access away from home.

This isn't a windows mobile phone with Wifi. It's made by apple, it'll be a cinch to use when it even sniffs a wifi hotspot. Your wife will be all over it.

Rocketman
Sep 6, 2007, 05:21 PM
SDK now.


Apple approves what songs and artists go on iTunes. They even have blessed partner-customers that do it for them on small publishers.

Why not shift that model to iPhone and iTouch and charge a 10-20% download fee for blessed software sales.

Blessed music, movies, games, podcasts and ringtones are not erased on updates. All it needs is a blessing server for apps and a blessed app list in iTunes.

Rocketman

kitki83
Sep 6, 2007, 05:28 PM
I have a question does the Itunes in iTouch have feature to subscribe to podcast or get some podcast?

Snowy_River
Sep 6, 2007, 05:50 PM
you are correct, to a point. Apple does NOT normally do this, however. Point to ONE item where they have. I've seen upgrades for the same price, or similar features with some aspect downgraded (say iMac using Intel 950 for students in lieu of ATI for less $$).

Erhm... Aperture?

iVoid
Sep 6, 2007, 06:15 PM
Apple approves what songs and artists go on iTunes. They even have blessed partner-customers that do it for them on small publishers.

Why not shift that model to iPhone and iTouch and charge a 10-20% download fee for blessed software sales.

Blessed music, movies, games, podcasts and ringtones are not erased on updates. All it needs is a blessing server for apps and a blessed app list in iTunes.

Rocketman

I don't particularly want ANY company to decide what is 'blessed' to be on my iPhone.

If it's one way to get apps and data on my iPhone, fine. But if it's the only way? No deal.

Apple's already seeming a bit to restrictive lately (7.4 removing non-iTunes ringtones, for example) for my tastes. I know it's mostly the music companies playing hardball, but Apple's getting a bit too hungry for controlling things for my tastes.

Why shouldn't a user be able to record his brat saying 'gogo gaga' and using if for his ringtone/mail sound/sms sound/etc?

Cheffy Dave
Sep 6, 2007, 06:40 PM
People this is an Apple Rev A device. I would HIGHLY recommend not buying it unless you want to be ripped off.

Do you think Apple came up with this product, had it designed, manufactured, and tested all within the last 2 months since the iPhone debuted? Obviously not. It's no secret that Apple was obviously planning the price reduction from day one. There's no component price fluctuation that could even come close to making up $200 worth of parts that drop in price in 2 months. None.

Apple took a very shady route and voluntarily ripped all of the early iPhone adopters and BEST MARKETERS they could have ever wished for. Here's the thing::

This thing has a max hard disk of 16 GB. They already dropped the smaller iPhone with good reason after only 2 months. 16 GB isn't much more when compared to other ipod-ish devices available now. Check out the newest Archos model for example. Sure, the interface isn't as good, but the space is exponentially larger. There's no doubt that Apple will dump this rev A version within a couple months max [again] and release a bigger version. 2-3 months from now and the iPhone is due for an actual physical upgrade if they want to stay competitive. 16 GB for a music & video player is atrocious for near-2008.

What happens then? Well, you will be screwed and PO'd like the iPhone buyers here. And again I'm not talking about normal product evolution and a normal pricing fluctuation. Apple has shown its core users a disgusting side of their quest for money. Mr. Jobs already said there will be No refunds for iPhone buyers. So even if that wasn't part of their original plan, it surely got a massive amount of negative media attention, yet when he had the chance to fix it even a bit [come on, even a $25 iTunes gift card would have sent a goodwill message to their users], he flat out poops on your face.

I'm not saying in any shape or form that products can't evolve and be marketed greatly. I am positive that this is a marketing and management blunder of unheard proportions for Apple fans. If you buy now, you will be sorry. There is no question of that. :o

A $100 refund was announced today, so much for no refunds, just facts please

cmcconkey
Sep 6, 2007, 06:55 PM
I don't particularly want ANY company to decide what is 'blessed' to be on my iPhone.

If it's one way to get apps and data on my iPhone, fine. But if it's the only way? No deal.

Apple's already seeming a bit to restrictive lately (7.4 removing non-iTunes ringtones, for example) for my tastes. I know it's mostly the music companies playing hardball, but Apple's getting a bit too hungry for controlling things for my tastes.

Why shouldn't a user be able to record his brat saying 'gogo gaga' and using if for his ringtone/mail sound/sms sound/etc?

I agree about not liking a company telling me what I can and cannot have on my device. But in a tech support standpoint it really makes things easy when you call them with a problem and have no 3rd party apps on there. They know basically what they have to run through to get you fixed up quickly. I am sure once the "new" wears off of the iPhone and iPod Touch they will open it up to 3rd party apps. They just need to get the bugs worked out of it and then it will probably be opened up for everyone to start developing apps for it.


Christopher

ChrisA
Sep 6, 2007, 07:22 PM
There isn't a microphone listed on the specs page. Shame really, because it would be nice for a dictaphone like application if nothing else.

You can buy a mic for an Ipod. There are already three avilable. here is a review.
Will these work with iPod touch? Don't know but I assume they would and if
they don't work they will soon.
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmedia/2007/05/18/ipod-mic-shootout.html

zim
Sep 6, 2007, 08:33 PM
My prediction is that the iPod Touch will go the way of the iPod PhotoŚmerger into a single deviceŚas soon as the iPhone is no longer tied to ATT.

Having the abilities for dictations would have been nice... iPod can do that with add-ons.

My biggest question is if the new iPods and iPod touch are capable of being used as hard drives just as the current iPods.

macintel4me
Sep 6, 2007, 08:51 PM
My prediction is that the iPod Touch will go the way of the iPod PhotoŚmerger into a single deviceŚas soon as the iPhone is no longer tied to ATT.
When the 5 (or so) year exclusive deal with AT&T is completed, there is a good chance that WiMAX will be in a lot of major cities. I could see iPod being the VoIP phone of choice. Right now WiFi = "Probably Not Connected" and AT&T = "Always Connected". In the future, WiMAX = "Probably Connected" and AT&T will cut their rates in half to compete.

s57
Sep 6, 2007, 09:03 PM
What a joke, how could it not have Mail? Very lame Apple, very lame!

I was about ready to order one when I realized it doesn't have mail.app. I can do without Google maps and certainly without the stock widget, but no mail? This reminds me very much of the digital camera market, where companies disable features on their camera so they can sell more expensive, virtually identical versions that have the features enabled.

Not everybody wants to be slaved to AT&T @ $50/month, and the iPodTouch would be the ideal PDA had they enabled mail. If they were to sell it with mail.app (and throw in Google maps for good measure) at $100 more, I'd run out and buy one tomorrow.

I can only guess that AT&T is pressuring Apple not to include any communication features in the iPod Touch. How could Apple have manouvered themselves into this corner, though?

madmaxmedia
Sep 6, 2007, 09:12 PM
Mail and the other Apple apps left out of the Touch should be trivial to hack/copy over to the Touch.

I'm gonna wait until people try it before ordering just to be safe, but I'm pretty sure it will be done quickly. Installing Mail is gonna be one of the first hacks people try.

Not everybody wants to be slaved to AT&T @ $50/month, and the iPodTouch would be the ideal PDA had they enabled mail. If they were to sell it with mail.app (and throw in Google maps for good measure) at $100 more, I'd run out and buy one tomorrow.

I can only guess that AT&T is pressuring Apple not to include any communication features in the iPod Touch. How could Apple have manouvered themselves into this corner, though?

jackc
Sep 6, 2007, 09:27 PM
Mail and the other Apple apps left out of the Touch should be trivial to hack/copy over to the Touch.

I'm gonna wait until people try it before ordering just to be safe, but I'm pretty sure it will be done quickly. Installing Mail is gonna be one of the first hacks people try.

Yeah, it'll be interesting to see what happens after they start shipping.

aafuss1
Sep 6, 2007, 10:10 PM
No camera connector or notes support, I noticed.

Rocketman
Sep 6, 2007, 10:12 PM
I refer you to history.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=269748&page=2

Post#
37
40
42
46
52
56
60
67
75
77
95
96

97

Rocketman

gadgetgirl85
Sep 6, 2007, 11:00 PM
Mail and the other Apple apps left out of the Touch should be trivial to hack/copy over to the Touch.

I'm gonna wait until people try it before ordering just to be safe, but I'm pretty sure it will be done quickly. Installing Mail is gonna be one of the first hacks people try.

This might be a stupid question but could a mail app be a future upgrade from Apple?

AppleMatt389
Sep 6, 2007, 11:01 PM
just found something from an old rumour thread about a possible wifi enabled ipod in second half of 2007. someone posted this image of an intel device

http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS8166710404.html

if u look at the first icon on the bottom it looks like safari (or am i going crazy) and the second icon looks exactly the same as the music icon on the iPod touch.

something fishy?

winterspan
Sep 6, 2007, 11:03 PM
I was about ready to order one when I realized it doesn't have mail.app. I can do without Google maps and certainly without the stock widget, but no mail? This reminds me very much of the digital camera market, where companies disable features on their camera so they can sell more expensive, virtually identical versions that have the features enabled.

Not everybody wants to be slaved to AT&T @ $50/month, and the iPodTouch would be the ideal PDA had they enabled mail. If they were to sell it with mail.app (and throw in Google maps for good measure) at $100 more, I'd run out and buy one tomorrow.

I can only guess that AT&T is pressuring Apple not to include any communication features in the iPod Touch. How could Apple have manouvered themselves into this corner, though?

Obviously they want to keep things like mail strictly to the iPhone for differentiation and to get you to upgrade. And Im sure AT&T had at least a indirect influence on this. But it really amazes me how 40%+ of the people on MacRumors are moaning about having the mail app. Its an IPOD for god's sakes. I think we are all EXTREMELY LUCKY to even get a fully functional Safari, Calendar, and Contacts WITH A FULLY FUNCTIONING KEYBOARD!

Im absolutely overjoyed they finally decided to release an OSX multi-touch
iPod.. and for only $299.99!
Just weeks ago, people were praying they could even get a bare bones iPhone -like iPod, and now they are complaining about the smallest details.

My god, just use ajax WEBMAIL or wait 3 days after it comes out when hackers will put mail.app on it anyways.....

sw

kenaustus
Sep 6, 2007, 11:13 PM
When looking that the iPod touch (and the iPhone) my thinking is that Apple is holding things tight in the early days. They know a SDK for the Touch will be one for the iPhone as well. In a way I can't blame them, especially since the 4 Gb iPhone would blow its memory rather fast.

More will come, but I think the main effort is now on Leopard. there may well be some new Touch/iPhone apps released when Leopard is released - a nice motivator to buy Leopard.

I also think that Apple will take the same accounting approach they took with the iPhone - spreading some of the revenues over 2 years - on all OS X based devices. This allows for continual enhancements without charging the customer.

As for an SDK coming after Leopard, or early January, I have my doubts. I believe that Apple wants to feel very comfortable with how these new products are going before opening it into the wild. I also wouldn't be too upset if Apple controlled downloads via iTunes if it would give me additional confidence that there are not malware problems in the apps developed. The benefit of that approach is that new versions of the OS or other updates wouldn't screw up apps you install on the side. Like Widgets on the Mac basically.

As for reaching for my credit card, I'm waiting for a bump in the storage of the iPhone to 16 gigs at $399 - plus educational discount. That will be next year, which is fine with me as I have a mountain of medical bills to pay off first.

Overall I'm impressed with the Touch and believe that Apple will add some nice apps in the near future. Look for the first update shortly after the first deliveries.

kalam623
Sep 6, 2007, 11:18 PM
Apple is not the company it used to be obviously.

The cell market will not tolerate the ass reaming Apple gives with it's high prices on old technology (Apple Tax).

The fact is the iPhone was NOT selling very well at the prior price once the initial fans had all bought it. If Apple were satisfied with the sales pace do you really think they would have lowered the prices? No way in hell. Face it, Apple had to lower the price to continue sales momentum.

I saw the unit for the first time earlier this week. My first thought, neat phone but to me it was not $600 of phone.

(sarcasm) oh yea for sure....thats why they've only sold ALMOST A MILLION....instead idk 5 MILLION in the first few months....it is all so clear to me now....it was clearly not selling well...thank you for the enlightenment....WHAT ARE YOU ON CRACK?!?!

dobbs383
Sep 6, 2007, 11:51 PM
How many places could you actually use Safari and a mail app on the new Ipod? You would have to make a point of being in a hot spot, Star Bucks, airport, or pulling in a signal from your home network. I still see this device as an Ipod, a device primarily for listening to music.

I'm a freshman at a big university (40,000 students, 900+ acre campus) and I have free wireless everywhere I go on campus. So if your a student or work on a college campus the new ipod could be used just about everywhere. Anyone else know if you can listen to music via shared networks on the iphone/ipod touch?

winterspan
Sep 7, 2007, 12:06 AM
(sarcasm) oh yea for sure....thats why they've only sold ALMOST A MILLION....instead idk 5 MILLION in the first few months....it is all so clear to me now....it was clearly not selling well...thank you for the enlightenment....WHAT ARE YOU ON CRACK?!?!

@kalam623 Yea.. whats funny about what that guy wrote that you were responding to and all the other people on here saying that the iPhone wasn't selling well should remember

1) Its well known why a no-contract mp3 player will sell more than
a $600, 2-year contract, exclusive-carrier-cell phone, yet Microsoft's Zune
only hit its millionth sale about a month ago (9 months since intro)

2) The motorola RAZR, One of the best selling phones in HISTORY having sold over 50 million, took nearly four months of sales to reach the 750,000 unit mark back in 2004.

There are many other examples, but anyway you cut it, selling a million high-priced cellphones with a REQUIRED 2-year no-subsidization contract
only available on ONE carrier (one of the least liked too, btw) is a big accomplishment, whether Apple or anybody else.

With the new price cut in place I can ONLY IMAGINE how many they will sell. And if you count the "iTouch" - it should be more still... (I count it, cause its basically the same device)

winterspan
Sep 7, 2007, 12:14 AM
I'm a freshman at a big university (40,000 students, 900+ acre campus) and I have free wireless everywhere I go on campus. So if your a student or work on a college campus the new ipod could be used just about everywhere. Anyone else know if you can listen to music via shared networks on the iphone/ipod touch?

Sorry, I don't actually have an answer to your question, I just wanted to say how cool that would be! You mean being able to connect to someones Itunes library over the LAN right? well "good news/bad news"

Good News:
Well the DAAP protocol that iTunes uses to share music, had been reverse engineered, and there were some linux apps that could stream iTunes songs, so I imagine with the code open sourced, someone could hack the a code library onto the iPhone/Touch with some effort. but.....

Bad News:
With the release of iTunes 7.0, Apple blocked all 3rd-party DAAP clients (the ba$tards!) so it no longer works. So until someone hacks the new version, we are all out of luck. (unless you find someone on campus with iTunes 6 or earlier.)

Wait.. though... now that I think about it, Im sure iTunes 7.0 probably passes a verification key with the DAAP handshake to another iTunes client, so you could probably figure out how to spoof it.. well it would take alot of work anyways... (hackers out there --> take this as a hint)

Im really excited to see what people are able to accomplish with the iPhone/Touch over the coming months...

AppleiMac
Sep 7, 2007, 12:22 AM
Man people are complainers! The iPod Touch has Safari and WiFi! The general concensus before the launch was "That would be nice, but it's not going to happen". But it did! Apple really delivered something for everyone in this launch, I wouldn't have done anything different. Apple really has my attention now with it's new products. Pretty soon I'll have an iPhone and an iMac. :)

elgruga
Sep 7, 2007, 12:34 AM
Time to CONGRATULATE Apple on a brilliant period of work - the iPhone, followed by the new iPods and the of course, the iPod touch.

The idea of wifi in the touch is to allow downloading of music, and casual web browsing, etc. Email through Gmail is fine.

If you need the other stuff buy the iPhone - ITS THE SAME FRIGGING PRICE! (and you get a phone)

Can you imagine ANY other company doing what Apple has done?
No, didnt think so.
If it wasnt for Steve Jobs, we'd be stuck with some Gates/M$ s***-brown zune brick-phone on wheels with a giant power adapter and a long cord hanging off it....

And well done Apple for giving $100 to those early iPhone buyers. IMHO, they dont really deserve it, but what a classy move.

What a fine company - just dont forget they are a PROFIT-making machine guys, not your special buddy.

elgruga
Sep 7, 2007, 12:47 AM
And for the record, Microsoft has NOT sold a million zunes.
They have SHIPPED a million - thats not nearly the same thing.

Now they drop the price to $200 - why, because they sold a million?

I think not.

Evangelion
Sep 7, 2007, 02:05 AM
It was obvious that the Touch uses the same OS as iPhone does. What I want to know is this: is the screen glass (like in iPhone) or plastic?

winterspan
Sep 7, 2007, 02:15 AM
Time to CONGRATULATE Apple on a brilliant period of work - the iPhone, followed by the new iPods and the of course, the iPod touch.

The idea of wifi in the touch is to allow downloading of music, and casual web browsing, etc. Email through Gmail is fine.

If you need the other stuff buy the iPhone - ITS THE SAME FRIGGING PRICE! (and you get a phone)

Can you imagine ANY other company doing what Apple has done?
No, didnt think so.
If it wasnt for Steve Jobs, we'd be stuck with some Gates/M$ s***-brown zune brick-phone on wheels with a giant power adapter and a long cord hanging off it....

And well done Apple for giving $100 to those early iPhone buyers. IMHO, they dont really deserve it, but what a classy move.

What a fine company - just dont forget they are a PROFIT-making machine guys, not your special buddy.

Well Said elgruga, WELL SAID!

winterspan
Sep 7, 2007, 02:18 AM
It was obvious that the Touch uses the same OS as iPhone does. What I want to know is this: is the screen glass (like in iPhone) or plastic?

Due to Apples big focus on environmentally-friendly build materials lately (to keep greenpeace a step back or two) coupled with the idea they would save money with economies of scale even if the glass is more expensive, I would assume it would be exactly the same glass as the iPhone. Not sure though....

emotion
Sep 7, 2007, 03:17 AM
Time to CONGRATULATE Apple on a brilliant period of work - the iPhone, followed by the new iPods and the of course, the iPod touch.

The idea of wifi in the touch is to allow downloading of music, and casual web browsing, etc. Email through Gmail is fine.

If you need the other stuff buy the iPhone - ITS THE SAME FRIGGING PRICE! (and you get a phone)


I agree that Apple has done well here. The new products look very good indeed.

However the Touch and the iPhone are not really the same price. Effectively Apple are probably subsidizing that new price from the 10% of contract revenues they get from ATT. The contract is worth, what, $1500+?

Chimaera
Sep 7, 2007, 04:32 AM
Annoyingly Apple release another highly desirable bit of kit that doesn't *quite* cover the bases I need covered to justify the purchase :(

With the iPhone its lack of 3G and lack of modem capabilities (Yes I know in the US you have quite a lot of free wireless thus negating some of the limitation of Edge data speeds, here in the UK that's not the case). Also I use my laptop a LOT when I travel and being able to connect to the internet to IM my girlfriend and family helps keep me sane when I'm stuck at the wrong end of the country - with the iPhone I wouldn't be able to do that without a seperate contract and modem - sod that.

Of course we still haven't got the iPhone over here anyway :)

With the iPod touch I'd really like bluetooth capability (so I could at least hook it into my mobile for data) and also some of the other apps on the iPhone - particularly Notes. My PDA requirements are pretty modest and that would about cover it.

Still, the Touch is *awfully* tempting - I'll be watching the hackers with a great deal of interest.

Evangelion
Sep 7, 2007, 05:27 AM
Here is an interesting perspective.

http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/hughes/18066

His "perspective" makes no sense.

No Phone: The new iPod Touch may have more storage, but it doesn't have a phone. This means you still have to carry two devices: a phone and the iPod Touch.

I already carry two devices: My company-issued cell-phone and iPod Mini. I couldn't drop the phone even if I had an iPhone.

No Camera: The 2-megapixel camera is gone.

Yeah, and my camera has no mp3-player in it. For shame!

No Bluetooth or EDGE: This means no bluetooth headphones, headset, or access to the Internet when you can't find a hotspot. Bummer.

BT would be nice, but it's absence does not change the fact that Touch is HUGE step forward from my Mini. None of the other iPods have BT either.

Wi-Fi: Woohoo, it has Wi-Fi Ś but what's the use of having Wi-Fi if you can't always access a hotspot outside the house? Once you walk out the door, the only place you have free access to the Internet is at Starbucks to buy music.

Huh? Starbucks is the only place that offers free WiFi? Um, there are LOTS of places that offer free WiFi. Hell, I can get free WiFi by walking down the street!

Storage: Why, oh why on earth would you pay $299 for an 8GB iPod or $399 for 16GB? OK, so it's flash-based, has a multi-touch interface, a beautiful 3.5-inch display, and Wi-Fi capabilities, but the price just seems outrageous when the 160GB metal iPod Classic is only $349. Makes me wanna weep.

Because Touch does things that Classic does not? There are more to these devices than mere storage.

No New Features: The iPod Touch is just an iPhone without a phone.

It has loads of new features when compared to other existing iPods.

iShak
Sep 7, 2007, 05:40 AM
And for the record, Microsoft has NOT sold a million zunes.
They have SHIPPED a million - thats not nearly the same thing.

Now they drop the price to $200 - why, because they sold a million?

I think not.

Apple dropped iPhone's price 'by' $200 because they sold a million ...


*stares in silence*

goosnarrggh
Sep 7, 2007, 07:02 AM
A $100 refund was announced today, so much for no refunds, just facts please

Ok, to be pedantic, here's a FACT: It's not a refund, it's a store credit.

The only people getting a true refund (ie. cash in hand equal to the dollar amount by which the iPhone's price was reduced) are people who bought it less than 14 days previously (and are thus protected by the company store's price policy), or people who have price protection guarantees through their credit cards.

jacktiernan
Sep 7, 2007, 07:11 AM
I am interested in a new Itouch but I'm concerned on the itouch internet using safari, in that I am a current macbook user wuth internet connection as of present day and time, I have charter highspeed internet wifi, question is this when you buy the new iTouch in that you have to sign up for internet service again or you can connect to your existing internet provider? Someone please let me know. thanx, robert

I'm pretty sure that if you currently connect to the net through a wireless router, then when you get your ipod touch you can easily set it up to connect to the internet through that.

sry, i don;t know what "charter" wifi is, hope my answer made some sense!

:o

PodHead
Sep 7, 2007, 07:55 AM
If they could, everybody would be using their products. ;)

I'm with ya. I love reading post that say "If *insert apple product here* would do *insert task specific to that person only* I would totally buy it." While mail could be beneficial for a lot of people, it's an iPod for christ sake. As long as it plays MUSIC that should warrant a purchase. Everything else is a bonus.

emotion
Sep 7, 2007, 07:59 AM
I'm with ya. I love reading post that say "If *insert apple product here* would do *insert task specific to that person only* I would totally buy it." While mail could be beneficial for a lot of people, it's an iPod for christ sake. As long as it plays MUSIC that should warrant a purchase. Everything else is a bonus.

Not really. That's what the ipod classic and nano are for. This is another class of device.

cmcconkey
Sep 7, 2007, 08:15 AM
I'm with ya. I love reading post that say "If *insert apple product here* would do *insert task specific to that person only* I would totally buy it." While mail could be beneficial for a lot of people, it's an iPod for christ sake. As long as it plays MUSIC that should warrant a purchase. Everything else is a bonus.

This device is going to end up being the equivalent of a "PDA" or else Apple is going to miss a big wad of cash. A lot of people are getting tired of the big PDAs that do the same things and look the same as they did when they came out many years ago. You have PDAs that run Windows Mobile, or what ever it is called, that you have to restart up to 2 times a day just so that you can input a new contact. You have a PALM device that is running the same clunky web browser that it has had for years, and not to mention that their OS is VERY bland. These are just my observations in what I have dealt with personally and in helping friends & coworkers.

Christopher

bdj21ya
Sep 7, 2007, 08:16 AM
I love the existing 3rd party apps. They've really added some fun new functionality for my iPhone. What will be truly awesome is when they get some documentation out to make the process easier. Right now it takes a bit too much hacking for me to figure out how to write my own apps.

clintanson
Sep 7, 2007, 08:22 AM
No-one is talking about Wi-Fi being used for Wireless Headphones......can this be done???.........Bluetooth???

i0Nic
Sep 7, 2007, 08:56 AM
Since the touch and the iphone are the same price now, Apple should've included at least the whole feature set of apps that's on the iPhone. Even including the camera and bluetooth should've been an option. Since they are going this route, may as well go the whole hog. Afterall, the phone is the actual differentiating factor between the devices.

happydude
Sep 7, 2007, 08:56 AM
doesn't quite seem worth it to me. still saving up for iphone once current and very crappy tmobile service contract is out in feb. by then we should be seeing 16GB iphone . . . sweet.

Evangelion
Sep 7, 2007, 08:56 AM
No-one is talking about Wi-Fi being used for Wireless Headphones......can this be done???.........Bluetooth???

Wifi-headphones make absolutely no sense. Bluetooth-headphones would make sense.

SteveG4Cube
Sep 7, 2007, 09:05 AM
Maybe this is a stupid question, but on the bottom of the iPhone and iPod touch, there's a white square with rounded edges. Isn't that the camera?

MonkeyClaw
Sep 7, 2007, 09:08 AM
Maybe this is a stupid question, but on the bottom of the iPhone and iPod touch, there's a white square with rounded edges. Isn't that the camera?

For the longest time I swore it was (like before the iPhone was released). But alas its just a symbol for the iPhone and iPodTouch's home button. But damn it looks like an iSight, haha.

Chundles
Sep 7, 2007, 09:09 AM
Maybe this is a stupid question, but on the bottom of the iPhone and iPod touch, there's a white square with rounded edges. Isn't that the camera?

Erm, no that's the Home button. The camera on the iPhone is on the back of the unit.

SteveG4Cube
Sep 7, 2007, 09:09 AM
Gotcha, thanks for the clarification. Guess I need some hands on time with an iPhone. :D

peharri
Sep 7, 2007, 09:38 AM
It's what's missing that bothers me.

I'd have liked to see Bluetooth in the device. Bluetooth has a number of advantages, not just in the increasingly popular wireless headphones sense but also that hackers (in the good sense of the word) would have been able to add functionality like access to the Internet via a paired cellphone that would have been handy and made me see the use in having Internet access on the device. I currently have Opera on my DS, and while there are implementation issues, the major thing that I felt kills it is that you need 802.11 access to use it, so it's not even a browser of last resort. The chances are that if you have 802.11 access, you already have a "real" computer in the area.

(No, an iPhone isn't the answer here. I've thought about it a lot, and I seriously don't want my phone to be an iPhone. I don't want to either be locked to an Apple approved carrier, or else play "dodge the update" games with Apple. I don't want my access to the world to be based upon how much music I've listened to (killing the batteries...) I do want the ease of a real keypad with physical feedback when dialing, I do want voice recognition, I don't give a crap about "Visual voicemail", I do want MMS messaging, etc. I don't want a bar phone as my primary phone. At this stage I absolutely do not want an iPhone, and can only see buying one happening should Apple produce genuinely unlocked versions, so I can use my carrier of choice, and swap SIMs when I want a real phone.)

I'm not so bothered about Google maps, email or the lack of a camera. The capacity, at 16Gb, is fine.

But, right now, I'm still inclined to hope that SD card storage reaches the 10s of Gb soon, so that systems like Nokia's N800 become completely usable as primary music devices. I'm hoping that in the medium term, Apple will relent with Bluetooth anyway, as it's the natural way to implement "just works" interfaces to car audio systems, combined headsets that support cellphones and MP3 players, etc.

dr_lha
Sep 7, 2007, 09:47 AM
This device is going to end up being the equivalent of a "PDA" or else Apple is going to miss a big wad of cash. A lot of people are getting tired of the big PDAs that do the same things and look the same as they did when they came out many years ago. You have PDAs that run Windows Mobile, or what ever it is called, that you have to restart up to 2 times a day just so that you can input a new contact. You have a PALM device that is running the same clunky web browser that it has had for years, and not to mention that their OS is VERY bland. These are just my observations in what I have dealt with personally and in helping friends & coworkers.
Apple will do well not to call this a PDA, because PDA sales are in the toilet these days. This is certainly not the time to introduce a new line of PDAs. Its the fact that the iPod touch is most akin to a PDA which makes me a bit fuzzy on what the market actually is for it. I mean, if you want small, get a Nano, if you want storage get a classic. I still can't help the feeling that the iPod touch with its moderate storage capabilities and iPhone/PDA like features is a bit of a white elephant in the line up, I can't figure out who its supposed to appeal to.

clintanson
Sep 7, 2007, 09:50 AM
Wifi-headphones make absolutely no sense. Bluetooth-headphones would make sense.

thx for the reply.........yeah I do get the two mixed up.....I thought my iMac plays AirTunes with AirPort so maybe it's possible to do the same using Wi-Fi on the iPod Touch somehow.......I didn't know that there was no Bluetooth either........a bit dissapointing.........

dr_lha
Sep 7, 2007, 09:50 AM
The chances are that if you have 802.11 access, you already have a "real" computer in the area.

Depends where you are. Since getting an iPhone I've been surprised where I can pick up free WiFi. For example, several of my local pubs have free WiFi, the Grocery Store has free WiFi and my dentist has free WiFi. I would say that I spend probably about 70-90% of my time within reach of a free or accessible (e.g. work/home) WiFi signal.

peharri
Sep 7, 2007, 09:50 AM
No-one is talking about Wi-Fi being used for Wireless Headphones......can this be done???.........Bluetooth???

Yes and no.

On a practical level, it can be implemented and could enjoy the benefits of the greater amount of bandwidth 802.11 gives you over Bluetooth. There are a number of issues however:

1. There are no serious, widely used, obvious standardized music protocols for connecting audio applications to headphones over an internet connection. I'm not saying there aren't protocols in existence that do parts of the job, GNU/Linux's esound is one example of a pure "remote speaker" protocol, but that only covers the "Send sound to a device already on the network with an already known IP address" part of the system. It doesn't cover establishing a network connection for the headphones or advertising the audio player service to the audio originator.

Without a standardized way to take headphones out of a box, turn it on, tell your audio player to "Scan for headphones", select the new set, and "pair" them, all devices will be proprietary and refuse to interoperate with one another. In the mean time, I doubt any serious efforts are being made to make this work given Bluetooth already does it.

2. The power consumption of 802.11 is fairly high. Nintendo is able to get away with it on the DS by throttling down the 'b' variant to its slowest supported speed, barely 1Mbps. This speed is too little for uncompressed music, and compressed music requires a substantial amount of processing which makes headphones far more expensive and complex, also adding to the energy requirements of the device.

In practice, Bluetooth solves these problems by already doing it. The downside of BT is that it does have the compression issues, but on the other hand, as the only advantage of 802.11 here would be the improved bandwidth, which can only be achieved at the cost of creating new protocols and sucking batteries, it's a no-win situation.

In the end, I'm hoping Apple will eventually start to support Bluetooth in earnest. One hopes the iPhone will work as a wedge to get that kind of support into their audio devices in general.

clintanson
Sep 7, 2007, 09:59 AM
Yes and no.

On a practical level, it can be implemented and could enjoy the benefits of the greater amount of bandwidth 802.11 gives you over Bluetooth. There are a number of issues however:

1. There are no serious, widely used, obvious standardized music protocols for connecting audio applications to headphones over an internet connection. I'm not saying there aren't protocols in existence that do parts of the job, GNU/Linux's esound is one example of a pure "remote speaker" protocol, but that only covers the "Send sound to a device already on the network with an already known IP address" part of the system. It doesn't cover establishing a network connection for the headphones or advertising the audio player service to the audio originator.

Without a standardized way to take headphones out of a box, turn it on, tell your audio player to "Scan for headphones", select the new set, and "pair" them, all devices will be proprietary and refuse to interoperate with one another. In the mean time, I doubt any serious efforts are being made to make this work given Bluetooth already does it.

2. The power consumption of 802.11 is fairly high. Nintendo is able to get away with it on the DS by throttling down the 'b' variant to its slowest supported speed, barely 1Mbps. This speed is too little for uncompressed music, and compressed music requires a substantial amount of processing which makes headphones far more expensive and complex, also adding to the energy requirements of the device.

In practice, Bluetooth solves these problems by already doing it. The downside of BT is that it does have the compression issues, but on the other hand, as the only advantage of 802.11 here would be the improved bandwidth, which can only be achieved at the cost of creating new protocols and sucking batteries, it's a no-win situation.

In the end, I'm hoping Apple will eventually start to support Bluetooth in earnest. One hopes the iPhone will work as a wedge to get that kind of support into their audio devices in general.


oh ok

wow that was an eye-opener!

so u don't think there will be an Apple solution for Wireless Headphones anytime soon then?

peharri
Sep 7, 2007, 10:01 AM
Depends where you are. Since getting an iPhone I've been surprised where I can pick up free WiFi. For example, several of my local pubs have free WiFi, the Grocery Store has free WiFi and my dentist has free WiFi. I would say that I spend probably about 70-90% of my time within reach of a free or accessible (e.g. work/home) WiFi signal.

What I'm trying to convey is a little more complex. The chances are if you know that Wifi will be at a place where you're expecting to take an internet access device, you almost always know you'll be able to use a computer there.

If I go to the store, I know that it might be the case that at some stops along the way, including the store itself, there may be a Wifi access point, but I can't predict where. If I go to Orlando, I know that there may be Wifi access points on the way (at unpredictable locations), but the only place I know there's Wifi will be the hotel. And guess what - I can unpack my suitcase and use my laptop at the hotel.

Am I going to bother taking my Nintendo DS or iPod Touch to the store expecting to use it to connect to the Internet? Answer - hell no, the chances of it being useful anywhere where I might need it are low, so I'll make alternative arrangements and will not bother with lugging the thing around. Am I going to take it to Orlando? Again, no, my laptop will work in the only place where I can be sure Wifi exists, and lugging the "pocket browser" around makes no sense anywhere else.

Unless the Internet access can be reasonable assumed to be reliable and everywhere (occasional "walk a little" hole excepted), the usability of an Internet access device is limited, and becomes more of a nice to have than something that makes carrying that device compelling. If I can't rely upon the device, there's no compelling reason for me to have it.

That's what I meant by "The chances are that if you have 802.11 access, you already have a "real" computer in the area." Ok, 802.11 access exists in places you don't expect it, but that aspect to 802.11 is a problem, it's what prevents the system from "just working".

pubius
Sep 7, 2007, 10:08 AM
The fact that this is another class of device is late breaking news. What we have been waiting for since the widescreen ipod video rumors began (think years and years ago) is just that, a widescreen video IPOD. We hadn't been waiting for a jack of all trades, master of nothing PDA. Want a PDA? Buy an iphone.

p.s. - again, not directed at those of you who don't live in the USA, this argument is obviously not for you.
Not really. That's what the ipod classic and nano are for. This is another class of device.

cmcconkey
Sep 7, 2007, 10:27 AM
Apple will do well not to call this a PDA, because PDA sales are in the toilet these days. This is certainly not the time to introduce a new line of PDAs. Its the fact that the iPod touch is most akin to a PDA which makes me a bit fuzzy on what the market actually is for it. I mean, if you want small, get a Nano, if you want storage get a classic. I still can't help the feeling that the iPod touch with its moderate storage capabilities and iPhone/PDA like features is a bit of a white elephant in the line up, I can't figure out who its supposed to appeal to.

Oh trust me I know very well that PDA sales are in the toilet. All the PDAs that are out there now are pretty much the same, feature wise, as they were years ago. I hope that Apple doesn't market it as a PDA and I hope that it is never classed as a PDA because it will become a white elephant. This should be the next generation of a mobile device. They don't need to just keep making the mp3 player because there is only so far that you can go with it and it will fall into the same boat as the PDAs have because there has been nothing "New and Revolutionary" added to its product image.


Christopher

cmcconkey
Sep 7, 2007, 10:30 AM
The fact that this is another class of device is late breaking news. What we have been waiting for since the widescreen ipod video rumors began (think years and years ago) is just that, a widescreen video IPOD. We hadn't been waiting for a jack of all trades, master of nothing PDA. Want a PDA? Buy an iphone.

p.s. - again, not directed at those of you who don't live in the USA, this argument is obviously not for you.

I am really sick if the "if you want <insert feature here> then get an iPhone" people that are going to switch to AT&T for the iPhone are ones that are not in contract and/or are not happy with their current carrier. I am neither of those, I am with Verizon and happy with them. I am VERY sure that I am not the only one that would like some iPhone features but without the phone. This is where the need for a product that will fill this void. If Apple doesn't fill it with the iPod Touch then someone else will and Apple will be playing catch up, and we all don't want to see that.

Christopher

Thomas2006
Sep 7, 2007, 10:42 AM
SDK now.
I think we will see an SDK at the WWDC2008.

madmaxmedia
Sep 7, 2007, 11:04 AM
While you obviously can't access wifi everywhere you go (at least most of the population can't), I generally have my iPod with my the majority of the time anyway. The one thing Apple did with the Touch vs. the competing Archos and others' devices, is that it is very small and pocketable. The others you might need to carry with you or keep in a case, instead of going in your pocket. The iPod Touch is incredibly sleek and thin (considering it's screen size, OS, etc.)

'Lugging' is a bit of an overstatement, don't you think?

Besides, it's just a bonus feature to its main purpose- play music and movies.

Am I going to bother taking my Nintendo DS or iPod Touch to the store expecting to use it to connect to the Internet? Answer - hell no, the chances of it being useful anywhere where I might need it are low, so I'll make alternative arrangements and will not bother with lugging the thing around. Am I going to take it to Orlando? Again, no, my laptop will work in the only place where I can be sure Wifi exists, and lugging the "pocket browser" around makes no sense anywhere else.

shoelessone
Sep 7, 2007, 11:11 AM
Another great thing for me: I am backpacking around europe next summer and last time I did this I used internet cafes all the time (booking hostels, etc, etc). Now, with my iPod touch I should be able to save money by avoiding internet cafes. Plus I'll be able to update my travel blog more regularly. It would be INCREDIBLE if there was a way to get my photos from my camera to my iPod touch so I could somehow post those as well, but oh well. Perhaps in a years time there will be something like that.

wizard
Sep 7, 2007, 11:29 AM
I'm sure that Apple is strategically choosing what to put on the iPod touch. They've got to give people some incentive to step up to the iPhone, and if there are key features which only the iPhone has, they'll go for it.


Errr....

The incentive to step up to the iPhone is the fact that it is an iPhone. That is a CELL PHONE.

As far as Apple and choosing software to put on this device, I would not be surprised if that is still up in the air. Once Apple realizes that they have not so much a media player but an hand held computing device they will likely see the need to add much ore in the way of software to the unit. This family of devices could easily hold their own against things like the Nokia N800 with just a bit of tweaking. Give people the ability to create or load apps of their choosing and you will see big demand for these devices.

Now the TOUCH is not a perfect competitor to the N800, there are issues of size and features. The TOUCH would have to grow to support Bluetooth (so far no indication that it does) at the very least for example. The point is between the iPhone and the TOUCH Apple has effectively produced another computing line that has huge potential for future models. Going slightly larger but still keeping the unit pocketable could yield a machine with surprising capabilities.

The future looks bright with the TOUCH.

Dave

madmaxmedia
Sep 7, 2007, 11:38 AM
Errr....
The incentive to step up to the iPhone is the fact that it is an iPhone. That is a CELL PHONE.

There are so many posts about this, I'm not sure why people aren't arguing about how Apple is going to 'convert' iPod Shuffle sales into Nano sales, Nano sales into Classic sales, etc...

You have a wide range of products at different price points and with different feature sets, to address different significant market segments. This way you can get some revenue from everyone. The point is NOT to try to funnel everyone into buying a Mac Pro or something like that. IF you only need a Mini, you buy a Mac Mini.

As far as Apple and choosing software to put on this device, I would not be surprised if that is still up in the air. Once Apple realizes that they have not so much a media player but an hand held computing device they will likely see the need to add much ore in the way of software to the unit. This family of devices could easily hold their own against things like the Nokia N800 with just a bit of tweaking. Give people the ability to create or load apps of their choosing and you will see big demand for these devices.

I think Apple has been exploring the possibilities since the first inception of the iPod. But for now, it's important that they market it as an iPod, because sales of music players are so much higher than sales of PDA's. But the Touch is a great evolution of the iPod, and allows Apple to gradually build in more functionality. Look at all that empty space on the home screen! ;)

cmcconkey
Sep 7, 2007, 11:44 AM
There are so many posts about this, I'm not sure why people aren't arguing about how Apple is going to 'convert' iPod Shuffle sales into Nano sales, Nano sales into Classic sales, etc...

You have a wide range of products at different price points and with different feature sets, to address different significant market segments. This way you can get some revenue from everyone. The point is NOT to try to funnel everyone into buying a Mac Pro or something like that. IF you only need a Mini, you buy a Mac Mini.



I think Apple has been exploring the possibilities since the first inception of the iPod. But for now, it's important that they market it as an iPod, because sales of music players are so much higher than sales of PDA's. But the Touch is a great evolution of the iPod, and allows Apple to gradually build in more functionality. Look at all that empty space on the home screen! ;)


Those points are the ones that I have been trying to get across ever since the rumor of the Touch iPod first came up. You have to make different models to allow the consumer to choose what they want or their money.


Christopher

wizard
Sep 7, 2007, 11:47 AM
Who else thinks that the iPod touch and the iPhone are exactly the same hardware with only a firmware change to disable features? I think its very likely. Its probably cheaper for apple to produce only one version of the hardware rather than redesign the thing. I know video card companies do this all the time. If this is so it leads to the possibility of unlocking the phone capabilities with some software/hardware modifications.

Exactly no! That would be far to expensive. Very close to the same hardware is another thing altogether. I would suspect that all of he Cell Phone hardware is missing from the touch. The reasoning is simple it wouldn't be needed for the touch, would add costs and drain power from the unit.

Personally the thing I would like to know is if BlueTooth is supported. That would vastly expand the capabilities of the unit. Again I suspect not. I see this unit as an introductory unit that will quickly be supplemented by more advanced units with more capability. At least it should be as there is much potential here. I do hope that Apple realizes what they have here and quickly move to flesh out the product line. The next move ought to be a higher capacity iPhone followed quickly by a slightly improved TOUCH that has more ports and memory.

By improved I mean slightly larger in size to support a larger screen. The unit still needs to be pocketable but I think there is some room to grow here. The larger screen just makes it easier to run a variety of applications. It should have more RAM to allow better multitasking and hopefully to allow better browser support. More Flash wouldn't hurt either and the larger size should help there. I suspect though that larger Flash sizes are coming just as soon as they can get the chips. Finally more ports wouldn't hurt either. If Bluetooth isn't in the TOUCH then it needs to be in its sister model. It would also be nice to see a normal USB port also, this to allow sporadic hooking up to printers and such when networking isn't available. All of this should be doable in a slightly larger device. All we are talking about is like a half inch bigger iPhone.

Dave

madmaxmedia
Sep 7, 2007, 12:02 PM
All of this should be doable in a slightly larger device. All we are talking about is like a half inch bigger iPhone.

Dave

I like your ideas, but not at the expense of a bigger unit. I think Apple will continue to add features, as they are feasible in approximately the current size.

There's a significant cut-off in portability when you go from small enough to easily fit in your pocket, to being just outside of that. There's wiggle room in that definition, but Apple won't clearly step beyond it (not that you were promoting a huge increase or anything, I'm just saying in general.)

I think Apple will add BT, more memory, etc. by next year in exactly the same case size (unless there is a HD model which will of course be thicker.) They can even get a bigger screen in, since there is room in the front.

wizard
Sep 7, 2007, 12:10 PM
There are so many posts about this, I'm not sure why people aren't arguing about how Apple is going to 'convert' iPod Shuffle sales into Nano sales, Nano sales into Classic sales, etc...

Exactly! Just as I'm certain that Apple will come out with a smaller, lower cost iPhone of some type in the future.


You have a wide range of products at different price points and with different feature sets, to address different significant market segments. This way you can get some revenue from everyone.

Yep. What people seem to forget already is that Apple is fresh into the cell market. They can not stay in that market with just one device. It is not just an issue of revenue either, if you want to be a significant player you have to have a reasonable percentage of the market, that just doesn't happen with one device.

In other words Apple has no choice but to add to its phone and pod line ups and do a bit of cross over. If not they will eventually loose market share.

The point is NOT to try to funnel everyone into buying a Mac Pro or something like that. IF you only need a Mini, you buy a Mac Mini.



I think Apple has been exploring the possibilities since the first inception of the iPod. But for now, it's important that they market it as an iPod, because sales of music players are so much higher than sales of PDA's.

Well considering the tanking of PDA sales one would not want to be associated with that business. Much of the bloodshed in the PDA business is due to things like the iPhone and similar devices from other companies. So I agree the association with the iPod line is a good thing, but quickly expanding capabilities beyond the simple media player is also important.

In the end I don't think most people want to carry a lot of different devices around with them. That is why continuing to expand the iPhone range is important. It is also why it is important that people are given the ability to configure the units to their specific usage patterns. i.e. be able to load apps as needed.

But the Touch is a great evolution of the iPod, and allows Apple to gradually build in more functionality. Look at all that empty space on the home screen! ;)

The empty space is tempting. I'm really hoping that the product line is already fleshed out and that they are working on the next models to add to the line. It is to bad Apple doesn't have a web site for people to put in feature suggestions.

Dave

yagrax
Sep 7, 2007, 12:24 PM
Hey, i was just wondering do you think people will be able to AIM and Yahoo instant messenger? I also wish it had blue tooth so we could eventually use cord less head phones.

Hacked iPhone users have been using iChat and/or ApolloIM for instant messaging for a month now. I use iChat, it's AIM for the iPhone. Not sure about Yahoo... iChat runs as a standard iPhone app, and will also run in the background once you've signed in and does the message popup like the normal SMS pops you get, when you get an IM. Anyone who hasn't hacked their iPhone is missing out on at last count 45 apps which aren't getting a lot of press because they're hack apps. Almost all of them are well beyond the "beta" period. I would think almost all of these would run on iPodT. It should be the same OS and CPU hardware under the covers, if not missing mic vibrator and edge network.

One thought, Apple please release Contacts for the iPhone as you show on the iPodT. I hate having to go though Phone to see my contact information - especially when I'm not calling anyone and just need some info.

Also, iPodT 16MB gives us iPhone users hope that a 16MB or bigger iPhone is right around the corner.

You can clearly see the savings Apple will see, they will develop apps for a single OS/CPU platform and be able to release those features to both the iPodT and iPhone at the same time. I bet iPodT is for those people who 1) don't need a cell phone, or 2) are locked in a contract with another carrier at the moment - this makes more sense when you look at the realitively small pricing differences between iPodT and iPhone now. I would expect to see more of the iPod line run or be upgraded to Mac OS X and have the same CPU in later versions.

wizard
Sep 7, 2007, 12:37 PM
I like your ideas, but not at the expense of a bigger unit. I think Apple will continue to add features, as they are feasible in approximately the current size.

I like my ideas too ;) But really the reason for the slightly larger device is pretty simple I'd prefer bigger pixels. It is an old fart thing. Something that only can be understood when reaching the later stages of life.

On the other hand the larger box makes for more room for battery and other features. Thus we should be able to make use of more RAM and ports. This by the way means an additional model. We wouldn't be getting rid of the current device.


There's a significant cut-off in portability when you go from small enough to easily fit in your pocket, to being just outside of that. There's wiggle room in that definition, but Apple won't clearly step beyond it (not that you were promoting a huge increase or anything, I'm just saying in general.)

Yes I agree entirely, a portable device needs to fit into a pocket easily. I believe there is room for the larger size and keeping it pocketable, the larger screen size would be worth it.

As to Apple stepping outside these boundaries I see that as very possible with a device targeted at a slightly different market. A slate type device could be extremely useful to the average college student and even a lot of professionals. Laptops aren't suitable for everything, mainly again due to size. If Apple can get the input methods optimized I could see a lot of people carrying around a slate type device instead of a laptop.

By the way I don't think the current Touch interface is ready for that. But as a future product it appears ot be a good possibility.


I think Apple will add BT, more memory, etc. by next year in exactly the same case size (unless there is a HD model which will of course be thicker.) They can even get a bigger screen in, since there is room in the front.

The lack of Bluetooth is bothersome as it should have fit into this model no problem. I'm not sure how a higher screen would fit into the device though. The big problem is that even with its limitations this device is very tempting to say the least.

Dave

cmcconkey
Sep 7, 2007, 12:46 PM
The lack of Bluetooth is bothersome as it should have fit into this model no problem. I'm not sure how a higher screen would fit into the device though. The big problem is that even with its limitations this device is very tempting to say the least.

Dave

I wouldn't be surprised that when the iPod Touch is release it will have a BlueTooth module nestled down inside of it. That would be just like Apple to do, just like with the wireless N that they had in all C2D models but it wasn't fully active. Just a little flip of a firmware switch.

Christopher

yagrax
Sep 7, 2007, 12:48 PM
It's what's missing that bothers me.

I'd have liked to see Bluetooth in the device. Bluetooth has a number of advantages, not just in the increasingly popular wireless headphones sense but also that hackers (in the good sense of the word) would have been able to add functionality like access to the Internet via a paired cellphone that would have been handy and made me see the use in having Internet access on the device. I currently have Opera on my DS, and while there are implementation issues, the major thing that I felt kills it is that you need 802.11 access to use it, so it's not even a browser of last resort. The chances are that if you have 802.11 access, you already have a "real" computer in the area.

(No, an iPhone isn't the answer here. I've thought about it a lot, and I seriously don't want my phone to be an iPhone. I don't want to either be locked to an Apple approved carrier, or else play "dodge the update" games with Apple. I don't want my access to the world to be based upon how much music I've listened to (killing the batteries...) I do want the ease of a real keypad with physical feedback when dialing, I do want voice recognition, I don't give a crap about "Visual voicemail", I do want MMS messaging, etc. I don't want a bar phone as my primary phone. At this stage I absolutely do not want an iPhone, and can only see buying one happening should Apple produce genuinely unlocked versions, so I can use my carrier of choice, and swap SIMs when I want a real phone.)

I'm not so bothered about Google maps, email or the lack of a camera. The capacity, at 16Gb, is fine.

But, right now, I'm still inclined to hope that SD card storage reaches the 10s of Gb soon, so that systems like Nokia's N800 become completely usable as primary music devices. I'm hoping that in the medium term, Apple will relent with Bluetooth anyway, as it's the natural way to implement "just works" interfaces to car audio systems, combined headsets that support cellphones and MP3 players, etc.

You should really look at the iPhone objectively, respectfully a lot of your assumptions may be influenced by the bogus and uninformed mainstream media reports, honestly I was in the same boat as you when I was deciding on an iPhone. With your current carrier, you are most likely locked in for 2 years anyway, same with the iPhone so what's the diff? Having the iPhone play music does not really take up that much battery juice. Even if it did, chances are that you are near a charger nearly all the time - wall plug, car, etc. And to be honest the charging is very fast, much faster than my clumpy ole 30gig video iPod! Keyboard is way better than you think it is. The lack of physical is more than made up with by the way the keyboard software tries to recognize what you're typing by expanding and contracting the touchspots on-the-fly, you really have to use it to understand it's beauty, it's a sorely overlooked technology wonder of the iPhone. Voice recognition seems more like a nice-to-have than a must-have feature. Cool yes, required probably not. I'm sure a hack is working on it right now. MMS can be done via hack apps, hacks are now super simple to do, especially with iBricker and iFuntastic, ignore the mainstream press about the 20 pages of instructions, it's simply not true anymore. New apps come out everyday, most of the people I know don't even know about them. One last thing, try to think of the iPhone/iPodT's as a pocket computer. They run Mac OS X have a very powerful CPU a file system, input and output, etc...software possibilities are endless, bend your mind, it's a freakin mico-mac, man!

Check out...

iBricker - http://cre.ations.net/creation/ibrickr
hack app list http://pxl.ibrickr.com/

wizard
Sep 7, 2007, 01:05 PM
I'm looking forward to see where this takes us. Very promising indeed.

Best product revision Apple has come out with in a very VERY long time if you ask me. It is no perfect by any means but as product one it is pretty amazing and the price is hard to beat.

I'm a little put off by the lack of a2dp on iphone with bluetooth (for stereo headphone support) but at least there's a chance it can happen. If there's no BT then no chance. Shame, for an iPod that's a major omission.

The apparent lack of Bluetooth is an issue. Hopefully only an issue for product #1. It is not just a2dp but rather all the potential it removes form the device.


Possibly to stop people making it a wi-fi phone.
Possibly or rather also possible is that Apple simple trimmed as much hardware as possible from this unit. The idea of course being to keep the price low.

In any event there is the hope that the lack of Bluetooth doesn't happen. It wouldn't be unknown for Apple to restrict a little info until D-Day.

dave

Surreal
Sep 7, 2007, 01:27 PM
Everybody saying "it's not a PDA, get over it" should stop and think for a minute.

I have an 80GB 5G iPod. i have 74GB of music. i buy CDs frequently. I am most likely going to buy a 160GB Classic.

My desire for an iPod touch is because i want a PDA. NOT an ipod.

wizard
Sep 7, 2007, 01:40 PM
Apple will do well not to call this a PDA, because PDA sales are in the toilet these days. This is certainly not the time to introduce a new line of PDAs. Its the fact that the iPod touch is most akin to a PDA which makes me a bit fuzzy on what the market actually is for it. I mean, if you want small, get a Nano, if you want storage get a classic. I still can't help the feeling that the iPod touch with its moderate storage capabilities and iPhone/PDA like features is a bit of a white elephant in the line up, I can't figure out who its supposed to appeal to.

Yeah PDA sales are in the tank. In part due to companies like Apple introducing smart cell phones. This unit however is very far from being a PDA. PDA's have never been associated with the ability to deliver multimedia.

The best way to look at this device is as part of the iPhone/iPod family that sits off the iPhone branch. It delivers those capabilities without what can be seen as negatives on the iPhone (the Cell and camera functions). It gives people the choice of buying into the TOUCH world of the iPhone without those limitations.

In any event the key to all of this is OS/X on these devices. They give you the capability of a full blown computer in the palm of your hand. At least OS wise baring the obvious hardware limitations. Apple is not selling PDA's but rather hand held computing platforms that are all part of one family. They are optimized for different task obviously but share a common underlying system. Thus you have the specialized iPod Touch for multimedia and the iPhone for Cell usage. I'm sure we will have future products, fouced on what ever too.

Storage can be an issue there is no doubt about that. Do realize though that for many 4 gig bytes of storage would be plenty. Not everybody plugs up their iPod with music or video. In any event the storage problems will be solved in a short period of time I suspect. It really is a question of technology, there is a lot happening in the world of flash right now. Beyond that I would not be surprised to see a Hard disk variant in the future. Remember this is product one and many people specifically look for flash based devices.

I'm actually impressed with this line up. Everything except for the Shuffle is well done revision wise, I don't see where the issue is. This from somebody that is not to please with Apples desktop and portable lines - and isn't even a media player user at the moment.

Dave

goosnarrggh
Sep 7, 2007, 02:39 PM
Yeah PDA sales are in the tank. In part due to companies like Apple introducing smart cell phones. This unit however is very far from being a PDA. PDA's have never been associated with the ability to deliver multimedia.
You're right. Until we see an SDK, this unit is much more limited than a modern PDA.

Every full-fledged PDA on the market today (or for the last several years for that matter) has the potential to deliver multimedia, so that cannot be what sets this device apart.

On the Palm side, you can at least view photos on every Palm PDA. Once you step above the bottom-of-the-line Z22, you'll find that every current Palm PDA can also playback audio and full-screen video.

On the Windows Mobile side, every Windows Mobile device has Windows Media Player built in. You can also easily add support for a wide variety of non-Windows Media formats. Either way, that implies playback of audio and full-screen video.

In any event the key to all of this is OS/X on these devices. They give you the capability of a full blown computer in the palm of your hand. At least OS wise baring the obvious hardware limitations. Apple is not selling PDA's but rather hand held computing platforms that are all part of one family. They are optimized for different task obviously but share a common underlying system. Thus you have the specialized iPod Touch for multimedia and the iPhone for Cell usage. I'm sure we will have future products, fouced on what ever too.
Sure. But with the facilities provided through Windows CE APIs, the same potential exists in conventional PDAs. (Haters might like to deny it. But the truth is, the Windows CE API really is quite rich.)

The fact is, so far that potential hasn't caught on to spark a revolution of handheld computer applications. Maybe in the long run, the iPhone / iPod Touch will succeed where other handhelds have failed.

madmaxmedia
Sep 7, 2007, 03:38 PM
One point about the PDA thing-

I think it's valuable to take a step back, and consider what a PDA is- 'Personal Digital Assistant'. While most PDA's are associated with productivity tasks, there is a wide realm of activities that handheld devices are useful for.

Many people use PDA's solely for storing contact and datebook info, which is why smart cell phones have largely replaced them.

I'm not saying we should redefine how the term 'PDA' is used, but in a sense even previous iPods could be called PDA's, or at least the iLife version of a PDA. Then throw in a big screen and cool interface for photos, Wifi, and the best mobile browser on the market, and things start to get even more interesting.

The iPod Touch is obviously positioned first and foremost as an iPod- a music and now video player. But wifi and the touchscreen interface give it a world of possibilities. Possibilities that will be exploited regardless of whether Apple provides an SDK for it.

I don't think Apple is going to go out of its way to lock down the iPhone or iPod Touch any more than it already has (and look how quickly the iPhone was hacked.) Apple makes money on the hardware, so hacking will only increase sales and profits (unlike say hacking or modding video game consoles to do stuff other than playing games.)

Every full-fledged PDA on the market today (or for the last several years for that matter) has the potential to deliver multimedia, so that cannot be what sets this device apart.

The fact is, so far that potential hasn't caught on to spark a revolution of handheld computer applications. Maybe in the long run, the iPhone / iPod Touch will succeed where other handhelds have failed.

Apple's iPod stands out because in this current world of smartphones and dedicated music and video players, a PDA is largely a technology in search of a solution. There are a lot of things you can do with them, but the majority of the population doesn't need to edit Office documents on the go, and synchronize them with their PC, etc.

That being said, hackers are going to add a lot of PDA functionality to the iPhone and Touch over the months ahead. So basically many people like me are going to have their cake and eat it too. I was looking forward to the Touch as my new iPod, but I'm also looking forward to using it as I used to use a PDA. So as you say, I think it will succeed not only as an iPod but as sort of a hybrid device as well for those who want it.

Thomas2006
Sep 7, 2007, 03:59 PM
I mean, if you want small, get a Nano, if you want storage get a classic. I still can't help the feeling that the iPod touch with its moderate storage capabilities and iPhone/PDA like features is a bit of a white elephant in the line up, I can't figure out who its supposed to appeal to.
The "touch" is the new "classic" and it is supposed to appeal to the same people the iPod classic is supposed to appeal to, but due to the amount of storage, or lack there of, it seems to be a 'white elephant in the line up'. As NAND flash memory gets cheaper the iPod touch will get larger capacities until it catches up to and replaces the iPod classic. It has started out with 8/16GB models, but they will move to 16/32GB then 32/64GB then, well, you get the picture, and best of all, the prices will stay the same or drop.

While adding "classic" to the original iPod gives consistency to the lineup, I think it has more to do with the iPod classic taking its first steps into hardware history. Due to the storage issue, 16GB for the "touch" vs. 160GB for the "classic" Apple has to sell both, but you can be sure they want to EOL the iPod classic ASAP. For this reason I do not think we will see any more hardware updates for the iPod classic. When the iPod touch get a 64GB model then the 80GB iPod classic will get dropped, and when the iPod touch gets a 128GB model the iPod classic will be but a memory.

madmaxmedia
Sep 7, 2007, 04:23 PM
Why would Apple want to EOL the Classic ASAP? What's the point, when Apple can offer a couple of different models depending on different users' habits? And make money either way?

Not long ago iPods topped out at 20GB, which seemed like a lot at the time. 16GB only seems small in comparison to the Classic models, but is still very large compared to the size of most peoples' iTunes collections. So it's not really a white elephant at all for many people.

Eventually, the HD may be totally eliminated from all iPods. But it will probably take another 2 years. Even then, someone will be complaining that they need the full terabyte for their music collection, so maybe Apple will always have an HD model. After all, they're not actually religiously opposed to hard drives you know- ;)

The "touch" is the new "classic" and it is supposed to appeal to the same people the iPod classic is supposed to appeal to, but due to the amount of storage, or lack there of, it seems to be a 'white elephant in the line up'. As NAND flash memory gets cheaper the iPod touch will get larger capacities until it catches up to and replaces the iPod classic. It has started out with 8/16GB models, but they will move to 16/32GB then 32/64GB then, well, you get the picture, and best of all, the prices will stay the same or drop.

While adding "classic" to the original iPod gives consistency to the lineup, I think it has more to do with the iPod classic taking its first steps into hardware history. Due to the storage issue, 16GB for the "touch" vs. 160GB for the "classic" Apple has to sell both, but you can be sure they want to EOL the iPod classic ASAP. For this reason I do not think we will see any more hardware updates for the iPod classic. When the iPod touch get a 64GB model then the 80GB iPod classic will get dropped, and when the iPod touch gets a 128GB model the iPod classic will be but a memory.

iJawn108
Sep 7, 2007, 06:18 PM
I am going to texas(I live in Canada) in like a month or so, and I want a ****in iPhone. I remember a way to activate it for like $50 bucks and then you had a working iPhone minus the phone. How does that work and would I be able to do it and then use it here?

danny_w
Sep 7, 2007, 06:25 PM
I am going to texas(I live in Canada) in like a month or so, and I want a ****in iPhone. I remember a way to activate it for like $50 bucks and then you had a working iPhone minus the phone. How does that work and would I be able to do it and then use it here?
You can activate the non-phone features of the iPhone for free (I think the product is iActivator or something like that).

Jarcrew
Sep 7, 2007, 06:40 PM
I would genuinely hate the ability to see the future, but I wish I could just take a peak and see where iPods will be five years from now. Because I certainly can't see them falling off the top of the tree between now and then.

iJawn108
Sep 7, 2007, 06:44 PM
You can activate the non-phone features of the iPhone for free (I think the product is iActivator or something like that).Oh wow! even cooler, I am sooo picking one up. I just want an original iPhone and I just like the look alot better to the iPod Touch.

Thank you for the info. :)

m-dogg
Sep 7, 2007, 11:09 PM
If I go to the store, I know that it might be the case that at some stops along the way, including the store itself, there may be a Wifi access point, but I can't predict where. If I go to Orlando, I know that there may be Wifi access points on the way (at unpredictable locations), but the only place I know there's Wifi will be the hotel. And guess what - I can unpack my suitcase and use my laptop at the hotel.

Am I going to bother taking my Nintendo DS or iPod Touch to the store expecting to use it to connect to the Internet? Answer - hell no, the chances of it being useful anywhere where I might need it are low, so I'll make alternative arrangements and will not bother with lugging the thing around. Am I going to take it to Orlando? Again, no, my laptop will work in the only place where I can be sure Wifi exists, and lugging the "pocket browser" around makes no sense anywhere else.


Ummm...maybe you should just take your iPod touch to Orlando with you and leave the laptop at home!

Unless you have some specific need for heavier computing, I rather 'lug' the iPod over the laptop...

A Pittarelli
Sep 8, 2007, 02:17 AM
there are only 3 important factors here,

1) best pda ever, can do what most people a laptop for
2) future potential, when 3rd parties can make apps the "touch" devices will really take off
3) most people who buy ipods have expendable funds. people arent maxing their credit cards to get new apple products(i hope)

i0Nic
Sep 8, 2007, 03:46 AM
The "touch" is the new "classic" and it is supposed to appeal to the same people the iPod classic is supposed to appeal to, but due to the amount of storage, or lack there of, it seems to be a 'white elephant in the line up'. As NAND flash memory gets cheaper the iPod touch will get larger capacities until it catches up to and replaces the iPod classic. It has started out with 8/16GB models, but they will move to 16/32GB then 32/64GB then, well, you get the picture, and best of all, the prices will stay the same or drop.

While adding "classic" to the original iPod gives consistency to the lineup, I think it has more to do with the iPod classic taking its first steps into hardware history. Due to the storage issue, 16GB for the "touch" vs. 160GB for the "classic" Apple has to sell both, but you can be sure they want to EOL the iPod classic ASAP. For this reason I do not think we will see any more hardware updates for the iPod classic. When the iPod touch get a 64GB model then the 80GB iPod classic will get dropped, and when the iPod touch gets a 128GB model the iPod classic will be but a memory.

I totally agree with you. The ipod classic is done, no more updates for it. That's why Apple decided to go all out with a 160gb hard drive, it needs to be top dog for the next year and compete with other high capacity players the year after that. In 2 years time the touch will have 128gb NAND capacity and the ipod classic will be gone.

Jan 2008- 16gb iphone, 32gb iPod touch
June 2008- 32gb iphone 2, introduction of iphone nano 16gb
Sep 2008- 64gb iPod touch 2
Jan 2009- 64gb iphone 2
Sep 2009- 128gb iphone 3, 128gb iPod touch 3, iPhone nano 2 32gb

(highest capacity models only)

aswitcher
Sep 8, 2007, 03:59 AM
I totally agree with you. The ipod classic is done, no more updates for it. That's why Apple decided to go all out with a 160gb hard drive, it needs to be top dog for the next year and compete with other high capacity players the year after that. In 2 years time the touch will have 128gb NAND capacity and the ipod classic will be gone.

Jan 2008- 16gb iphone, 32gb iPod touch
June 2008- 32gb iphone 2, introduction of iphone nano 16gb
Sep 2008- 64gb iPod touch 2
Jan 2009- 64gb iphone 2
Sep 2009- 128gb iphone 3, 128gb iPod touch 3, iPhone nano 2 32gb

(highest capacity models only)

I would be surprised to see that fast acceleration.

Last 3 years running its been one update a year, so I think whilst the phone will likely see 3G model and 16GB, the iPods could easily remain static until Sept 2008

i0Nic
Sep 8, 2007, 04:30 AM
I would be surprised to see that fast acceleration.

Last 3 years running its been one update a year, so I think whilst the phone will likely see 3G model and 16GB, the iPods could easily remain static until Sept 2008

I think we'll be seeing a slightly accelerated update rate, 32gb NAND chips will be available in big enough quantities in the first few months of the new year so I don't see why Apple couldn't put them in the touch. It already has a high enough price point.

With the phones, Apple definately needs to introduce a low end iPhone to really compete and gain marketshare and I think they will do it 3rd quarter 08. In the same year the iPhone will get a refresh with added features such as 3G, GPS, improved camera, and some currently unknown functionality. By 2009 flash chips will be easily available at 64gb capacities and at the end of the year 128gb will definately be an option. They will be included in a big event that will include a refresh of the entire line of ipods and iphones, with the ipod classic and click wheel becoming extinct (touch screen 'nanoshuffle' introduction- touch interface transitioning through to all Apple product lines inc ipods, Mac). The nano and shuffle will be merged into a gesture based touch device.

Sep 2009 event
2 ipod models:
'nanoshuffle' - 16gb $89, 32gb $149
iPod- 64gb $249, 128gb $349 (loses touch name)

Plus- iPod headphones (needs a name)- headphones that have a tiny control system, can be docked to the computer. Basically iPod inside the headphones. 2gb. Used for sport, replacement for the original shuffle. New nike+ perhaps. $49

2 phone models:
iPhone - 64gb $289, 128gb $399
iPhone nano- 16gb $199, 32gb $249

The fewer ipod models will be a sign of the transition from mainly ipods to mainly phones, it's the way the market is heading.

edit- I really believe this is where we are headed, however I might be too ambitious with the capacities so maybe instead of Sep 2009 we might see that event June 2010.

wizard
Sep 8, 2007, 07:08 AM
You're right. Until we see an SDK, this unit is much more limited than a modern PDA.

The question is: does Apple really want to control the market for software for these devices the way many of us think they do? I still wonder is a SDK is coming. Right now it could go either way.

The thing that most biases me to believing that a SDK is coming is the way Apple promotes that these units are running OS/X.


Every full-fledged PDA on the market today (or for the last several years for that matter) has the potential to deliver multimedia, so that cannot be what sets this device apart.

There is deliver and then there is DELIVER. None of the device I know about have multimedia as a primary focus nor do they have the memory space to support media. To me it is a bit of a stretch to compare a any of Apples iPods to a common PDA, as a Media device, especially with respect to ease of use.


On the Palm side, you can at least view photos on every Palm PDA. Once you step above the bottom-of-the-line Z22, you'll find that every current Palm PDA can also playback audio and full-screen video.

On the Windows Mobile side, every Windows Mobile device has Windows Media Player built in. You can also easily add support for a wide variety of non-Windows Media formats. Either way, that implies playback of audio and full-screen video.

Yes in each case though do they have the user interface to support media as strongly as Apple does. The point is the Apple devices have a primary task of being a media player none of the PDA's do. Playing media can take up much more of a units time than any collection of PDA functions.

The reason PDA's are dieing is that these seldom used functions can now be easily incorporated into a device that will get a lot more use and be judged a better value. Thus a media player like the touch may have a small percentage of its time in use applied to things like E-Mail and surfing the web. Even the iPhone is focused on Cell and music. Teh PDA functionality is just something that is along for the ride.



Sure. But with the facilities provided through Windows CE APIs, the same potential exists in conventional PDAs. (Haters might like to deny it. But the truth is, the Windows CE API really is quite rich.)

Win CE is an interesting product we have machine tools with it embedded in. For a handheld device though the apps are what will make of break it in the long run. There is a lack of satisfaction with respect to these devices. I'm willing to wager that part of the problem is the installation of apps that really don't transfer well to the hand held environment.


The fact is, so far that potential hasn't caught on to spark a revolution of handheld computer applications. Maybe in the long run, the iPhone / iPod Touch will succeed where other handhelds have failed.

Well if you are going to carry a computing device around in your pocket it has to meet a few needs. PDA's tried to meet that need but quickly go eclipsed by other technology. The other technology being the cell phone. Not just any cell phone but a smart cell phone. The simple reality is that most people don't even want a Cell phone in their pocket but put up with it due necessity. The minute smart phones could replace enough of the PDA's functionality, the PDA business started having trouble. Not only do people not want to carry a bunch of computing devices around with them they have learned over time what is important to have on their body. Most people don't need a crappy version of word or excel. They do need access to corporate E-Mail (hint to lurking Apple execs), the web, contacts, and such. A device that delivers these sorts of functions as an auxiliary to the devices primary functionality is very handy to have for many people. Sort of like buying a car with a trailer hitch, you may not use it often but having it there can solve problems from time to time. In the same vain I have CAD software installed on my Linux PC, CAD is not the PC's primary purpose but every once and a while it is very useful to have.

So PDA's don't sell well because other devices with different focuses get better utilization.


Dave

wizard
Sep 8, 2007, 07:28 AM
The "touch" is the new "classic" and it is supposed to appeal to the same people the iPod classic is supposed to appeal to, but due to the amount of storage, or lack there of, it seems to be a 'white elephant in the line up'.

I don't buy the white elephant BS at all. The touch is a unique device that is the first of its generation. The Flash allotment could be an issue for some there is no doubt there. On the other hand it is close to (is) leading edge capacity for such a device. The fact that this device came out first does not imply that it will never be versioned into a unit supporting a hard disk.

Lets face it Apple delivered a completely new lineup of iPods, the Touch being a small portion of that debut. Think of it as a new direction for the platform not a elephant of any kind.


As NAND flash memory gets cheaper the iPod touch will get larger capacities until it catches up to and replaces the iPod classic. It has started out with 8/16GB models, but they will move to 16/32GB then 32/64GB then, well, you get the picture, and best of all, the prices will stay the same or drop.

Yes the Touch will get updated with larger memory allotments but the question is when. I suspect that it will happen early next year.

That however does not imply catching up with a hard disk based unit. I suspect that disk based machines will have an advantage for the foreseeable future.

When discussing storage on a media device it is very interesting the spread in needs. Some can get by with a few gigs and others need the largest device they can find. Apple could put two disk drives into a Touch variant and still not satisfy everybody.


While adding "classic" to the original iPod gives consistency to the lineup, I think it has more to do with the iPod classic taking its first steps into hardware history. Due to the storage issue, 16GB for the "touch" vs. 160GB for the "classic" Apple has to sell both, but you can be sure they want to EOL the iPod classic ASAP. For this reason I do not think we will see any more hardware updates for the iPod classic.

I'm not sure you can justify theses positions. The classic will sell as long as there is demand. Even if Apple comes out with an HD based Touch you will still have people preferring one over the other.


When the iPod touch get a 64GB model then the 80GB iPod classic will get dropped, and when the iPod touch gets a 128GB model the iPod classic will be but a memory.

I just don't think it is going to be that easy. The classic has its place just as the Shuffle and the Nano do.

Dave

mrgreen4242
Sep 8, 2007, 09:13 AM
Who else thinks that the iPod touch and the iPhone are exactly the same hardware with only a firmware change to disable features? I think its very likely. Its probably cheaper for apple to produce only one version of the hardware rather than redesign the thing. I know video card companies do this all the time. If this is so it leads to the possibility of unlocking the phone capabilities with some software/hardware modifications.

As mentioned, it's a different size in both thickness and length, so no, definitely not the same hardware.

apple really did release amazing products yesterday. too bad some had to ruin all the good news with their B-eye-chin and complaining.Congratulations Apple, you sure do know how to make some kick-ass stuff.

It's nice stuff, but it has obvious flaws, which is what people are pointing out.

: 9-5-07 : Only time in the history of the world people have complained because something is cheaper than it was before.
People complain about price drops ALL THE TIME. Not just with Apple, either. A price drop on a video game console that comes right after a ton of people bought it, for example, always makes people complain.

But that is not the best way to check you mail, do you use webmail on your desktop, I think not!

I do. I use GMail at home, although I do access it with Mailplane from my desktop. It's very handy to have all my mail accessable from anywhere, not to mention immune to local system failures. I switched my entire office to Gmail business apps recently - that's about 30 people, and I'm not the first to do it. They have an amazing web interface and the search is of course fantastic.

What I want in a mail app from the Touch is a GMail integrated service (which isn't all that far fetched, since Apple and Google have been tight lately) that senses when the touch is online, and downloads any new messages from my GMail account to the Touch locally. The touch just needs to store unread messages locally, along with recently read messages (even if it wasn't recently received - just anything I've read in the last week), and any messages with a specific label (say, an iPod label). Messages I send are saved locally until it can get online and send them, which happens automatically when the Touch goes online.

It doesn't NEED to be a full mail application, for me. Just a way to quickly read new messages, send mail, and store a few key/new messages for offline browsing. The interface should be Gmail-esque, but simplified and designed around the touch screen/keyboardless access. You always have the option to go to GMail when you are online, so it doesn't need to have access to all the GMail features.

I'm hoping that Apple will either open up the Touch or someone will come up with a fairly simple way to install third party apps. Adding a mail client like that, along with a couple other small things like a notes app and a document viewer, would get me much more interested in the Touch. I'm pretty impressed as it is, but 8gb isn't big enough for me, and I'm not $400 interested. I'll wait for a 32gb version to be released, which should push the price of a refurb 16gb to about $250. Hopefully by that point the above features will be available and at that price it'll be a great bargain.

andrewag
Sep 9, 2007, 03:12 AM
This is almost the product I've been lusting over for so long!

One thing that would be cool to do with the cover flow view and the movement sensors is to tilt the iPod to a side and have the covers cycle that way.

Do the iPod games work on this? Does it come with sudoku too??

iShak
Sep 9, 2007, 05:13 AM
This is almost the product I've been lusting over for so long!

One thing that would be cool to do with the cover flow view and the movement sensors is to tilt the iPod to a side and have the covers cycle that way.

Do the iPod games work on this? Does it come with sudoku too??


two finger pinch, tap and drag and hold and flick, tilt and rotate, hold the buttton and click the button, drag to unlock and drag to shut down ...

and you want tilt to make the albums 'flow' as well? heh .. why not :)

shake to shuffle (yes I know I know .. sansa), slap to play/pause, hit your head to skipforward hit your bum to rewind, lick to lock screen and bite to turn off ...

people would spot you from a mile away, "oh here comes an iPod touch user, careful now kids that gentleman can get a little frisky towards the end of the song"

peharri
Sep 9, 2007, 07:43 AM
You should really look at the iPhone objectively, respectfully a lot of your assumptions may be influenced by the bogus and uninformed mainstream media reports


Ok, can you please not start a comment like this with what's effectively an insult?


honestly I was in the same boat as you when I was deciding on an iPhone. With your current carrier, you are most likely locked in for 2 years anyway, same with the iPhone so what's the diff?


Actually, I'm not. And my choice of carrier and desire to be able to pick carriers has nothing to do with contracts.

I use T-Mobile because, in this area, T-Mobile is good and AT&T isn't. AT&T's network appears to be oversubscribed and as such the quality of the network is so low it's often unusable. I base this on experience of both networks, and carry an AT&T GoPhone SIM around as a spare for those (increasingly rare) occasions that I can't get a T-Mobile signal and can get AT&T. I was on AT&T on a standard plan until about two years ago.

A one bar T-Mobile signal here in Martin County, Florida, is usable. You can hear what the other guy's saying. A one bar AT&T signal, using the same physical phone, isn't. I have to assume AT&T is using the half rate codecs (probably AMR-HR) which degrade very badly compared to the full rate codecs.

So you saying that there's no difference because of contract length is really not covering major issues that are serious to me. As far as I'm concerned, contract length is an issue, but a usable network is even more important. In some areas AT&T is good and T-Mobile is bad. Not here. And even if the reverse was true, I'd still like to decide for myself which network to use, not be forced to tie my hardware to a particular carrier.


Having the iPhone play music does not really take up that much battery juice. Even if it did, chances are that you are near a charger nearly all the time - wall plug, car, etc. And to be honest the charging is very fast, much faster than my clumpy ole 30gig video iPod!


That's good, though it's still not something I want to trade off one for the other, especially given my experience of iPod batteries, which after a year or so seem to plummet in life. I've been through the iPod battery self replacement process before, it's something I thought would be easy before I did it, and I added my name to the list of apologists on the subject. Then I did it. There's a reason why my current iPod still has a 2-3 hour battery life - I'm dreading replacing the battery, and actually considering buying a whole new MP3 player instead.


Keyboard is way better than you think it is.


If I'd said "Teh iPhone's keyboard sucks, I'd rather type "733442777pause777444" than "peharri" it's so much easier", then yeah, you'd have a point, but I'm talking about physical feedback, when you're holding the phone and dialing with one hand. If I'm using something as a phone, I want it to be a good phone. The iPhone's requirement to use a touch screen to dial out is a compromise that helps the non-phone functionality at the expense of the phone functionality, it isn't an improvement. It means hand eye coordination is a requirement.


Voice recognition seems more like a nice-to-have than a must-have feature. Cool yes, required probably not.


It seriously affects how usable the phone is. I consider it a must-have even if it isn't for you. I live in an area in which you can't get from A to B without driving. With a decent hands-free kit and voice recognition, the phone is usable, without one or the other you're another dangerous lunatic on the road if you so much as touch the phone.


MMS can be done via hack apps, hacks are now super simple to do, especially with iBricker and iFuntastic, ignore the mainstream press about the 20 pages of instructions, it's simply not true anymore.


If hacks weren't an issue, the initial complaint about the phone being locked wouldn't be either. I do not want to buy a device relying upon functionality being present that can be wiped out with a software update. It is not clear at this stage what Apple's plans are with iPhone, but they've previously given every indication that they consider it a closed platform. I can see iPod Touch being immune from deliberate tampering to disable hacks, if only because there's no carrier out there to enforce updates. But iPhone?


One last thing, try to think of the iPhone/iPodT's as a pocket computer. They run Mac OS X have a very powerful CPU a file system, input and output, etc...software possibilities are endless, bend your mind, it's a freakin mico-mac, man!


But that's not what Apple wants you to think, and with Apple's history of wanting control over the whole widget and whole user experience, it's not clear that either device will ever function as a "full computer" with Apple's blessing. (And it's no different to iPod in that respect anyway - my iPod has a full version of GNU/Linux installed (http://ipodlinux.org/Main_Page). As such it's as much a full computer as iPod Touch with OS X) iPod Touch is exciting (or would be) because there's no risk of it being permanently tied to Apple, like iPod, and unlike iPod it has significantly better hardware.

But there's no Bluetooth. So I'm not going to be able to use it in the way I want to use it, as a portable Internet/Multimedia device. Sure, some people will. People who live in large cities with a Starbucks on every corner will love it. Good for them. I'm not really living in that kind of environment, so at the end of the day I have to look at it as a cool looking iPod with some gimmicks that'll be useful from time to time but I'll never really be able to rely upon. Is it better than an iPod classic? For me, probably not. Is it more useful than my current iPod? For me, in terms of the features it offers, it's probably worse save for the temporary fix to my battery problem (which we'll replay in 12-18 months...)

Certainly, if I'm to look objectively, I would be better off getting an iPod classic (cheaper, more storage, USB storage mode right off the bat), or waiting for SD cards to get to a decent enough size and then get a Nokia N800.

But if Apple were to add Bluetooth to the iPod Touch, and it was clear enough OS X functionality was there to make it possible to set up a PPP over Bluetooth connection to a phone that supports GPRS/EDGE/whatever-the-CDMA2000-equivalent-is, I'd definitely take a second look.

peharri
Sep 9, 2007, 07:55 AM
'Lugging' is a bit of an overstatement, don't you think?


Well, I have limited pocket space. My wallet is in one, my phone and BT headset are in the other, and my iPod, if I carry it, is generally uncomfortable squeeze. For the longest time I just left it at work every day except when I knew I had updates for it at home.


Besides, it's just a bonus feature to its main purpose- play music and movies.

I know, but that's the point really. Even if you restrict yourself to Apple's line up, it's competing against three other iPod models which are, in their own way, superior in most senses except for the browsing gimmick. The iPod nano is cheaper though the capacity is an issue, and the iPod classic - well, there's no contest really. iPod Touch - cool looking and with a gimmick I'll rarely use so cannot see as a compelling reason to get it. iPod Classic - ten times the capacity of iPod Touch for $50 less and does everything else it does except the gimmick.

Unless internet access is implemented in a way useful to me, I have no reason to get the Touch. Which is where we come full circle. Now, I'd like Internet access, so it could be a selling feature, I'm just saying the way it's implemented now means it isn't, for me.

peharri
Sep 9, 2007, 08:01 AM
Ummm...maybe you should just take your iPod touch to Orlando with you and leave the laptop at home!

Unless you have some specific need for heavier computing, I rather 'lug' the iPod over the laptop...

I'm not planning on walking the 150-200 miles or so from here to Orlando!

The laptop has a bigger screen, has more capacity, can do things other than browse the web and play music, and both are equally portable given I'm taking a car anyway. Browsing the web is being done on a large screen that supports windowing and on browsers that support tabs. The laptop also has a real keyboard. What, exactly, is the advantage of the iPod here?

Taking an iPod to a hotel instead of a laptop because it's smaller is like buying shorts instead of trousers because you can fit more pairs of shorts in your large, oversized, walk-in closet.

MacinDoc
Sep 9, 2007, 10:06 AM
Unless internet access is implemented in a way useful to me, I have no reason to get the Touch. Which is where we come full circle. Now, I'd like Internet access, so it could be a selling feature, I'm just saying the way it's implemented now means it isn't, for me.
How could internet access possibly be improved on the Touch without making it a phone (with the possible exception of adding Flash support)? Browsing on a wireless G network is THE feature that makes me interested in the Touch. Mind you, I have a family of 6 competing for my MacBook, so any additional browsing device would be welcome.

That said, I will likely wait until at least a 32 GB model comes out before I purchase one, or possibly a 64 GB model.

jackc
Sep 9, 2007, 10:18 AM
I hope it doesn't take too long to get it to 32 GB. I have a feeling we could be waiting a little while.

MacinDoc
Sep 9, 2007, 10:35 AM
I hope it doesn't take too long to get it to 32 GB. I have a feeling we could be waiting a little while.
Well, Toshiba has already announced a 32 GB SD memory card, to be shipped by January. Can you say MWSF 2008?

MacinDoc
Sep 9, 2007, 10:40 AM
I would be surprised to see that fast acceleration.

Last 3 years running its been one update a year, so I think whilst the phone will likely see 3G model and 16GB, the iPods could easily remain static until Sept 2008
Unlikely. Competing flash-based MP3 players will offer 32 GB models in early 2008.

Recently, updates have been slow due to a lack of compelling hardware to base those upgrades on. With the pending release of 32 GB flash cards, that will change.

emotion
Sep 9, 2007, 10:42 AM
How could internet access possibly be improved on the Touch without making it a phone


Tethering to a 3.5G phone (liek the N95) via bluetooth? That would be killer.

MacinDoc
Sep 9, 2007, 10:53 AM
Tethering to a 3.5G phone (liek the N95) via bluetooth? That would be killer.
If you're going to do that, why not just make it a phone? Anyway, that would be much slower than wireless G. And besides, Apple wants us to buy the iPhone, not someone else's phone, so this will never happen.

emotion
Sep 9, 2007, 10:59 AM
If you're going to do that, why not just make it a phone?


When Apple sell an HSDPA iPhone....until then.


Anyway, that would be much slower than wireless G. And besides, Apple wants us to buy the iPhone, not someone else's phone, so this will never happen.

Wireless G is not available on most trains or outside very small areas inside towns. Moving around isn't particularly well handled compared with HSDPA.

I agree that the lack of bluetooth is deliberate to leverage the iphone.

MacinDoc
Sep 9, 2007, 11:11 AM
I agree that the lack of bluetooth is deliberate to leverage the iphone.
Exactly. Apple doesn't want you to buy the Touch and someone else's phone. If the Touch could be tethered to a phone via BT, this is exactly what ppl would do, at least until Apple offers a 3G iPhone. This would significantly impair Apple's entry into the cellphone market.

The other problem with Bluetooth is its effect on battery life. I know that when I turn BT on with my MB, my battery life is reduced by about 25%.

madmaxmedia
Sep 9, 2007, 11:12 AM
Well, I have limited pocket space. My wallet is in one, my phone and BT headset are in the other, and my iPod, if I carry it, is generally uncomfortable squeeze. For the longest time I just left it at work every day except when I knew I had updates for it at home.

True, I have the same issue. Although at 8mm thick it's too much of a squeeze. ;) I would never put it in the same pocket as my keys or anything though. I tend to always have my iPod with me anyway.

I know, but that's the point really. Even if you restrict yourself to Apple's line up, it's competing against three other iPod models which are, in their own way, superior in most senses except for the browsing gimmick. The iPod nano is cheaper though the capacity is an issue, and the iPod classic - well, there's no contest really. iPod Touch - cool looking and with a gimmick I'll rarely use so cannot see as a compelling reason to get it. iPod Classic - ten times the capacity of iPod Touch for $50 less and does everything else it does except the gimmick.

Unless internet access is implemented in a way useful to me, I have no reason to get the Touch. Which is where we come full circle. Now, I'd like Internet access, so it could be a selling feature, I'm just saying the way it's implemented now means it isn't, for me.

I still want the Touch because of the bigger screen. I have a LARGE collection of music, but with my experience with previous iPods and Shuffles, carrying my entire collection is less important to me than having a bigger screen for movies. For me, 16GB is enough to store around 10-12 movies and still have half the space for music.

The wifi and other potential functionalities are a bonus to me. Not the core feature, but a useful extra that is more than just a gimmick to me (although I understand that will differ for different people.)

I don't consider the Touch to be the 'best' iPod, it just fills the line out nicely IMO. The Touch clearly is the first step in a revolution of these devices, not just the iPod but the entire category. At the same time, I don't see Apple killing the Classic line anytime soon, because it does fill a clear niche as well- people who value maximum capacity first.

emotion
Sep 9, 2007, 11:19 AM
Exactly. Apple doesn't want you to buy the Touch and someone else's phone. If the Touch could be tethered to a phone via BT, this is exactly what ppl would do, at least until Apple offers a 3G iPhone. This would significantly impair Apple's entry into the cellphone market.

The other problem with Bluetooth is its effect on battery life. I know that when I turn BT on with my MB, my battery life is reduced by about 25%.

Aye, true. The 8mm thickness is probably only achievable by having a smaller battery than the iPhone.

I think BT could still be a feature but will only be turned on when the iPhone is 3G.

The money from the the iPod Touch is all Apple's not shared with AT&T. This calls for opposing strategies for the two devices. A very interesting situation to watch.

MacinDoc
Sep 9, 2007, 11:28 AM
Aye, true. The 8mm thickness is probably only achievable by having a smaller battery than the iPhone.

I think BT could still be a feature but will only be turned on when the iPhone is 3G.

The money from the the iPod Touch is all Apple's not shared with AT&T. This calls for opposing strategies for the two devices. A very interesting situation to watch.
I think that Apple would rather sell an iPhone than an iPod Touch. There is ongoing revenue (shared as you stated) from the iPhone, and besides, Apple already dominates the MP3 market, and wants to establish itself in the much larger cell phone market.

emotion
Sep 9, 2007, 11:33 AM
I think that Apple would rather sell an iPhone than an iPod Touch. There is ongoing revenue (shared as you stated) from the iPhone, and besides, Apple already dominates the MP3 market, and wants to establish itself in the much larger cell phone market.

Exactly. However the once thought of dead PDA market is now Apple's for the taking if they're clever with how limited they make the device.

It is conceivable that these kind of devices are the new computer market....Apple know's this very well.

cmcconkey
Sep 9, 2007, 11:37 AM
Wireless G is not available on most trains or outside very small areas inside towns. Moving around isn't particularly well handled compared with HSDPA.

Well the wave of the future is already happening. Hot spot cities, the city of South Pittsburg, TN has become a city wide hot spot. This town of only 3133 people had really stepped it up. If a city of this size can accomplish this then why can't many other cities take this step. Yes I understand it will cost more in the larger cities but its not like there isn't money being spent on something that is not going to benefit the town like city wide WIFI would.

Christopher

emotion
Sep 9, 2007, 11:41 AM
Well the wave of the future is already happening. Hot spot cities, the city of South Pittsburg, TN has become a city wide hot spot. This town of only 3133 people had really stepped it up. If a city of this size can accomplish this then why can't many other cities take this step. Yes I understand it will cost more in the larger cities but its not like there isn't money being spent on something that is not going to benefit the town like city wide WIFI would.


It's interesting to note SE and Nokia's strategy to deal with this.

I still think HSDPA is a better bet than wifi. The roaming and not having to sign on the wifi networks means HSDPA just works better than wifi (currently).