Third-Generation iPod Touch Teardown Reveals 802.11n-Capable Wi-Fi Chip

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/11/third-generation-ipod-touch-teardown-reveals-802-11n-capable-wi-fi-chip/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article/2009/09/11/155859-broadcom_bcm4329_500.jpg

iFixit has managed to get its hands on a 32 GB third-generation iPod touch and is in the process of tearing apart (http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPod-touch-3rd-Generation/1158/1) the device to get a look at the internals. While the new iPod touch is similar in many respects to the second-generation model, especially given the absence of a camera module, there are some hardware differences.

One of the more intriguing differences uncovered so far is the inclusion of a Broadcom BCM4329 (http://www.broadcom.com/products/Bluetooth/Bluetooth-RF-Silicon-and-Software-Solutions/BCM4329) combination Wi-Fi/Bluetooth chip, which supports the 802.11n Wi-Fi standard in addition to 802.11a/b/g standards. The iPhone 3GS and the second-generation iPod touch utilize a different BCM4325 chip (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/24/16-gb-iphone-3gs-teardown-reveals-178-96-parts-and-manufacturing-cost/), which supports only the 802.11a/b/g standards. While Apple has apparently not activated 802.11n capability in the iPod touch and it is unknown whether it will choose to do so in the future, the new iPod touch hardware does appear to be capable of supporting the standard.

Hints of the BCM4329 chip were initially spotted (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/04/05/next-gen-iphone-802-11n-and-video-editing/) in early iPhone OS 3.0 betas, leading to speculation that the next-generation iPhone might support 802.11n. The iPhone 3GS, however, was ultimately released with the BCM4325 chip and thus unable to support the faster Wi-Fi standard.

Other reports (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/04/06/next-generation-iphone-to-possibly-offer-fm-radio-reception-and-transmission/) earlier this year pointed to the BCM4329 chip's ability to both receive and transmit FM signals as a sign that Apple might look to add an FM tuner and possibly add the ability to transmit audio wirelessly to car stereos via FM radio. At the time, Apple had shown no interest in adding FM capabilities to its iPod line, but Apple's new iPod nano (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/09/apple-updates-entire-ipod-family-bringing-capacity-and-performance-bumps-to-ipod-touch-and-video-camera-to-ipod-nano/) released this week does include an FM tuner, suggesting that Apple may be rethinking that strategy.

Apple routinely does not take full advantage of the capabilities of various hardware components of its devices for various reasons, and there has been no indication that the company has plans to utilize the BCM4329 chip's expanded capabilities, but the possibility of such features being enabled in the future makes for interesting speculation.

Article Link: Third-Generation iPod Touch Teardown Reveals 802.11n-Capable Wi-Fi Chip (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/11/third-generation-ipod-touch-teardown-reveals-802-11n-capable-wi-fi-chip/)

[iBookG4user]

This is interesting. I wonder if Apple will charge you to activate the wireless N capabilities like they did for the MacBook Pros a few years back.

[chrmjenkins]

The offending tweet:

News flash: The Touch has a Broadcom BCM4329FKUBG wireless chip, which supports 802.11n! Even the iPhone 3GS doesn't do that!

http://twitter.com/ifixit

[puffnstuff]

I would love the ability for it to transmit FM

Such a pain to go through the whole set up of plugging it in my car and then having to unplug. Plus when I rent a car I forget to bring the cord or at someones home no way to plug it into the radio

[alent1234]

any word if there is an empty space where a camera was supposed to be? the one that was removed 2 weeks ago due to manufacturing problems?

I think transmitting FM would require FCC approval

[Gav2k]

The chip was prob cheaper at time of production as there would be no benifit to the device having pre-n if were all honest.

[BeyondtheTech]

Good thing I'm remaining eligible on two of my lines to get the successor to the 3GS. Given their track record, it'll be a nice jump for us in the summer of 2010 to go from the iPhone 3G to the iPhone 3GX. ;)

[RMo]

I guarantee that in a few months, Apple will relelase an "iPod touch 802.11n enabler," and it will cost you $10. Guarantee it.

I could also see something similar happen with FM receiver software and possibly an FM transmitter (how cool would THAT be to not need an external transmitter?!) in the future.

[sterlingindigo]

..."transmit audio wirelessly to car stereos via FM radio" :cool:

[andrew0122]

I was really hoping that this would have been standardized by now and in the 3GS. I have the Linksys Dual Band Router and it'd be nice to be able to switch it to Dual N instead of having one for N and the other only G for my iPhone.

[Beric]

Not bad.

I'd like to see some benchmarks, though.

[NathanA]

Whoa, hey, WAIT a minute...

...is it possible that the difference between the two different models of 3GS (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=757234) is that one contains the 4329 (11n) Broadcom chip and the other the 4325?? (Hey, I can dream, can't I?)

The Broadcom chip's markings in the FCC's documents are blacked out in the pictures, so there is no way to tell from the FCC filings. Someone really needs to do a dissection of both the BCGA1303A and the BCGA1303B and see if the differences are more than just variances in PCB designs!

-- Nathan

[spillproof]

Why not activate it now? But, its a good that they put a N capable chip in.

[Beric]

Just updated: it has room for the Nano camera, but not the iPhone's.

Wonder if Apple felt the Nano's camera wasn't "good enough" for the Touch?

[leomac08]

were is the camera?;)

[zygo]

The chip was prob cheaper at time of production as there would be no benifit to the device having pre-n if were all honest.

Would be handy for my media network... my media is running off a Mini, to Apple TV. But I can't use the remote app without it dropping that network to G.

If I connect to the G network I can't control my media.

Oh well-by the end of my 2yr contract [3GS] hopefully they will have enabled it on the next iterations of the iPhone.

[iVoid]

Interesting that there's room for a camera in there. Seems to indicate the production problems might have been true or Apple decided to leave the camera for the next rev of the Touch.


As for the Wireless-N, they might not use that functionality since they'd need more antennas than B/G. So even if the chip supports it, Apple might just have used it because it had all the other features they needed and not for the N capability.

[lostngone]

They used the chp for the FM receiver, however I wonder if they added the logic to use the 802.11n part of the chip. Its hard to believe they would go through the trouble and then just leave it dormant.

Of course I am still wondering why the Mighty Mouse has a speaker in it.

[alent1234]

Why not activate it now? But, its a good that they put a N capable chip in.

last i heard N is still not a final spec. once it's final Apple will be able to write drivers for it that will work with a variety of access points

[Vandam500]

Wow, that gets me pretty mad. Why? I have a 3GS and the Wifi chip doesn't support Wireless N. Why am I mad? An iPod Touch 3rd Gen owner pays $299 or $399 and that's it, no monthly fees. An iPhone 3GS owner pays $200 or $300 (I paid $430 btw) plus a steep monthly fee (2 years) which of course Apple gets a % of. Without a doubt 3GS owners are paying Apple minimum $500 dollars for the device and yet there are more advanced parts in a iPod Touch which they make less money off? Wow, just wow.

[PeterQVenkman]

Of course I am still wondering why the Mighty Mouse has a speaker in it.


So you can hear it scream after it breaks from 2 weeks of normal use.

[Beric]

Wow, that gets me pretty mad. Why? I have a 3GS and the Wifi chip doesn't support Wireless N. Why am I mad? An iPod Touch 3rd Gen owner pays $299 or $399 and that's it, no monthly fees. An iPhone 3GS owner pays $200 or $300 (I paid $430 btw) plus a steep monthly fee (2 years) which of course Apple gets a % of. Without a doubt 3GS owners are paying Apple minimum $500 dollars for the device and yet there are more advanced parts in a iPod Touch which they make less money off? Wow, just wow.

It was probably just as cheap for Apple to put the chip in as not. Or like 10 cents more.

[Bubba Satori]

Just updated: it has room for the Nano camera, but not the iPhone's.

Wonder if Apple felt the Nano's camera wasn't "good enough" for the Touch?

Probably. It's worthless. Seriously.

[NT1440]

last i heard N is still not a final spec. once it's final Apple will be able to write drivers for it that will work with a variety of access points

Draft N has been on the market for years now, and the board that does it stated that they will be fully supporting it in the official specs. My guess is either battery or some other limitation.

Probably. It's worthless. Seriously.

funny, gizmodo seems to think its just under if no on par with other handheld cameras like the flip.....

[Beric]

funny, gizmodo seems to think its just under if no on par with other handheld cameras like the flip.....

Yeah, I'm sure it's Youtube resolution or above, which is more than enough for what it's designed.

[alent1234]

Draft N has been on the market for years now, and the board that does it stated that they will be fully supporting it in the official specs. My guess is either battery or some other limitation.

i heard the first routers that shipped a few years ago aren't going to be compatible with the final spec, but the later ones will require a firmware upgrade

[joueboy]

Next update version 3.2 for $9.99. Minor added features, some bug fixes and of course activate 802.11n. Another reason for being sucked by Apple. This is ridiculous!

[Vandam500]

It was probably just as cheap for Apple to put the chip in as not. Or like 10 cents more.

Then why not put it into their flagship and highest revenue making device, the iPhone 3GS?

[iMacmatician]

Just updated: it has room for the Nano camera, but not the iPhone's.Nice. Increases the likelihood of those manufacturing problems rumor being true. Also shows they were at least seriously considering putting in a camera.

Of course I am still wondering why the Mighty Mouse has a speaker in it.:eek: :confused: :rolleyes: :D

[mpb2000]

Interesting about the camera. Maybe that video of the touch with a camera right there was real and it got scrapped because of technical difficulties. Honestly, I'm not that excited about taking video. Stills are much more useful to me, but not with a camera of that size. This might placate people that can't decide what to do right now. If it was only ever intended to hold the nano camera, that's not a big loss. Of course, apple really did drop the ball by doing nothing but providing a speed bump. They'll have to do something next time. For a higher end, multi-purpose device like the touch, the cheap nano camera just doesn't seem to be a good fit. Maybe apple is waiting to figure out how to do better.

[gopher]

With only 640x480 images on the iPod, it is no better than my Nokia 6260.
That resolution is lousy for still images. The iPhone has a much better camera. I hope the iPod Touch gets the same camera as the iPhone. That's when I'd consider getting one.

[NT1440]

i heard the first routers that shipped a few years ago aren't going to be compatible with the final spec, but the later ones will require a firmware upgrade

Where did you hear that? I've read all draft n devices will be supported, they may not get the few extra goodies or whatnot, but they will work.

^ Gopher: Thats exactly why the nano doesn't do still images.

[*LTD*]

Probably. It's worthless. Seriously.

Sometimes your trolling is really off, LOL.

[alent1234]

Where did you hear that? I've read all draft n devices will be supported, they may not get the few extra goodies or whatnot, but they will work.

^ Gopher: Thats exactly why the nano doesn't do still images.

one of the tech rags on the internet

[Plutonius]

any word if there is an empty space where a camera was supposed to be? the one that was removed 2 weeks ago due to manufacturing problems?

The iPod Touch was never getting a camera.

[wackymacky]

Surely it would make sence for :apple: to enable 802.11n so the people's networks would run faster and they would be happier with the over all :apple: experience rather than letting the iTouch/iPhone slow down the network.

(We arn't all going to rush out and up grade our routers to dual band)

[NT1440]

one of the tech rags on the internet

Hmm, I'll try to find the gizmodo article i was talking about.

[alent1234]

The iPod Touch was never getting a camera.

that's not what the cult was saying on wednesday after the shock of no camera. they all believed it was a real manufacturing issue a few weeks ago

[fenderbass146]

I love how people think N matters. I doubt most people have internet that is even near the max of wireless g, and even if you did you touch won't process web pages any faster. The device is a limitation, not the internet speed

[goobot]

Interesting that there's room for a camera in there. Seems to indicate the production problems might have been true or Apple decided to leave the camera for the next rev of the Touch.


As for the Wireless-N, they might not use that functionality since they'd need more antennas than B/G. So even if the chip supports it, Apple might just have used it because it had all the other features they needed and not for the N capability.


for the camera maybe there is just a spot? why must it be a spot for a camera and not just a regular spot?

[Beric]

So is the location of the "space" where the camera could have gone in the 3G Touch in the same place as all of the holes in the supposed 3G cases? I'm wondering if their was an initial leak of the camera, but the manufacturers never new it had been changed.

[kockgunner]

Wow, that gets me pretty mad. Why? I have a 3GS and the Wifi chip doesn't support Wireless N. Why am I mad? An iPod Touch 3rd Gen owner pays $299 or $399 and that's it, no monthly fees. An iPhone 3GS owner pays $200 or $300 (I paid $430 btw) plus a steep monthly fee (2 years) which of course Apple gets a % of. Without a doubt 3GS owners are paying Apple minimum $500 dollars for the device and yet there are more advanced parts in a iPod Touch which they make less money off? Wow, just wow.

I feel the same way. I know the 3GS is more of a refresh, but it seems like Apple was very shortsighted this time by not adding the wireless N chip on the 3GS.

[Chimpy]

There's no way they would charge for an update to activate the "N" functionality.

Then again, as a first gen iTouch owner that's paid for two OS upgrades I'm not sure why I'd think that...:)

[knewsom]

...give ya a nice new piece of hardware, and then totally not let you use it, or charge you more later on to use it.

LAME. If I could build a hackintosh phone, I would.

[Maven1975]

Well..make it thicker. This way they can stop producing two separate backs for the Touch and iPhone.

[Beric]

Well..make it thicker. This way they can stop producing two separate backs for the Touch and iPhone.

Did I hear the word "th***er"? That's heresy according to Steve.

(Of course, I wouldn't mind it a bit thicker myself. ;))

[slcoss]

Wow, that gets me pretty mad. Why? I have a 3GS and the Wifi chip doesn't support Wireless N. Why am I mad? An iPod Touch 3rd Gen owner pays $299 or $399 and that's it, no monthly fees. An iPhone 3GS owner pays $200 or $300 (I paid $430 btw) plus a steep monthly fee (2 years) which of course Apple gets a % of. Without a doubt 3GS owners are paying Apple minimum $500 dollars for the device and yet there are more advanced parts in a iPod Touch which they make less money off? Wow, just wow.

Well, yeah, but you iPhone users get... a phone... and internet almost everywhere. Besides, it's not like Wireless N is activated on the Touch.

And Apple does get a premium from the iPhone, but it gets it in a 2-year lapse of time, whereas with a Touch it gets the full amount upfront, probably why the Touch is "cheaper" on the long run.

[SpinThis!]

What the post doesn't mention is what flavor N that chip supports—the 802.11n standard supports both 2.4ghz and 5 ghz modes.

The real benefit of N that people are going to want to use is the magical 5 ghz mode and multiple antennas—some of the extra speed and range comes from not competing with the crowded 2.4 ghz band. But you need additional antennas to really make it worthwhile.

Even if the chip supports N completely, I'm going to play devil's advocate here and assume Apple's engineers did some testing and came to one of more of the following conclusions: 1) there simply wasn't enough room inside that case for the extra wiring to make it worth using for N and 2) the power drain of N mode wasn't worth the reduced battery life or their driver software wasn't ready.

[deconstruct60]

I love how people think N matters. I doubt most people have internet that is even near the max of wireless g, and even if you did you touch won't process web pages any faster. The device is a limitation, not the internet speed

Think Skype/VOIP. N will very substantially matter!!!!!

Granted the number of N enabled WiFi hotspots isn't extremely high, but the Touch as a more viable alternative to the iPhone.... damn skippy want to put N on it.

N will also matter in WiFi hotspots where have many folks pulling content at the same time since effectively sharing the same base tranmitter. Faster base lets it timeshare among more devices more easily.

[Bubba Satori]

Sometimes your trolling is really off, LOL.


It helps you deal with life to pigeonhole criticism as trolling, it's pretty pathetic. What insufferable arrogance. What were your Apple sales last year ?

[InkMaster]

I love how people think N matters. I doubt most people have internet that is even near the max of wireless g, and even if you did you touch won't process web pages any faster. The device is a limitation, not the internet speed

err... as hard as this may be to believe, sometimes you also transfer files from computer to computer within your own network...

and yes, when transferring a few gigs via wifi, I would much rather wait for a couple of minutes on N then for hours on G...

[emulator]

Then why not put it into their flagship and highest revenue making device, the iPhone 3GS?
Why are you surprised? the 3GS could have been designed 6 months or more earlier (phones need much longer approval time). Also, last years ipod was faster than the 3G.

besides, the 'n' is not even activated so do us a favour: stop whining and enjoy your phone.

[bjett92]

Of course I am still wondering why the Mighty Mouse has a speaker in it.
The Mighty Mouse has audio feedback. Try pressing the side buttons without plugging in the mouse and then press them with the mouse plugged in. Same with rolling the scroll ball.

[Vandam500]

Why are you surprised? the 3GS could have been designed 6 months or more earlier (phones need much longer approval time). Also, last years ipod was faster than the 3G.

besides, the 'n' is not even activated so do us a favour: stop whining and enjoy your phone.

I know about the phone approval time and I am not whining, I am just stating some opinions that I am sure I'm not the only with them.

By the way, I have a Wireless N router and would of loved for the 3GS to have the Wifi chip like the new Touch even if it would get activated on a future firmware update. But guess what, when that firmware comes out and activates the Wireless N for the Touch, us 3GS people aren't going to be able to enjoy it. What would we have to do to get Wireless N? Buy the next iPhone that does have it... that's why I am angry.

[pmjoe]

any word if there is an empty space where a camera was supposed to be? the one that was removed 2 weeks ago due to manufacturing problems?
There is no way the device's hardware changed that significantly, they had time to test the new design, make all the production changes and time to produce thousands so that they're already shipping ... in the past 2 weeks.

[coasterswim]

err... as hard as this may be to believe, sometimes you also transfer files from computer to computer within your own network...

and yes, when transferring a few gigs via wifi, I would much rather wait for a couple of minutes on N then for hours on G...

Where is this "transfer gigs of files via Wi-Fi from your computer to your iPhone" feature that Apple currently allows?

[Inkling]

I agree with others. It looks like the latest touch has at least the potential to become a gadget I'd want to buy:

1. WiFi N. Why? Speed isn't the issue. Because at home I could make my network N-only and make security a bit tighter. I'd also be ready when b/g becomes rarer.

2. FM transmit. Like others, I don't want to klutz with some external gadget to play through speakers. If the chip can do it, why not do it?

3. FM receive. Less a big deal, but not a bad idea.

5. Microphone. For VoIP and voice notes on the go. Without it, even a used 1-G iPhone makes more sense.

6. A decent camera with still and video photography. Again, handy for notes on the go and times when I didn't know I needed a camera. If space is an issue, make the touch thicker and put a bigger battery in most of that space. No one complains about the iPhone being too thick, they won't mind a less thin touch, particularly with double the battery life.

As it stands now, buying the new touch makes little sense. I can get the same features in a used touch for less and more features in a used 1-g iPhone, also for less. That's particularly true of the low-end touch, which ships without the remote earphones with mike. That makes it's real price $230.

Apple should quit being so secretive. If the current models are merely interim to fill in until the real 3-G touches come along, they should say so and give us dates.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

Looks intriguing.

I fully expected 802.11n right out of the box with this version. Camera would have been nice, too.

Well it seems a camera could fit. Maybe one's coming mid-cycle? FM tuner/transmitter would be really nice.

802.11n will probably roll around with iPhone OS 3.1.2 or so.

[*LTD*]

It helps you deal with life to pigeonhole criticism as trolling, it's pretty pathetic. What insufferable arrogance. What were your Apple sales last year ?

Do you think anyone gives a sweet damn that you sell Macs? Do you think that actually matters around here? It doesn't give you any more credibility when all you do around here is troll. And to top it all off, you're usually way out of touch with what's going on in the industry, despite you being an alleged Apple distributor/vendor.

And your "criticism" was hardly that. It was just more one-liner trolling. As usual. That's your calibre.

With the new Nano, watch Flip and Creative's marketshare in this segment take a huge dive. It's all but guaranteed. And really, it would come as no surprise. All Apple had to do was add a competitive videocamera to the Nano and ease of uploading to Youtube and such, and the thin form factor, great look, multimedia package, and larger screen will take it the rest of the way. It's a no-brainer.

[JeffDM]

last i heard N is still not a final spec. once it's final Apple will be able to write drivers for it that will work with a variety of access points

They offer 'n' in their notebooks, so why stop now?

Probably. It's worthless. Seriously.

It's actually pretty nice for the size and price, the biggest problem is the rolling shutter.

There's no way they would charge for an update to activate the "N" functionality.

Then again, as a first gen iTouch owner that's paid for two OS upgrades I'm not sure why I'd think that...:)

Apple had a paid "n" driver update for their MacBooks, why do you think they won't do it for the Touch?

I love how people think N matters. I doubt most people have internet that is even near the max of wireless g, and even if you did you touch won't process web pages any faster. The device is a limitation, not the internet speed

So longer range and better reception through and around obstacles aren't interesting benefits?

[zonesey]

well ima say woot woot when they actually bring mimo support with multiple antennae to the iphone

[zedsdead]

Based on this news, the prototype and the production mishap, it is very clear that Apple fully intended to include a video camera (but not a still) in the iPod Touch.

I imagine an update will happen in the relative near future. Apple would love to be able to market that before Christmas rather than after.

[deconstruct60]

Wow, that gets me pretty mad. Why? I have a 3GS and the Wifi chip doesn't support Wireless N. Why am I mad? An iPod Touch 3rd Gen owner pays $299 or $399 and that's it, no monthly fees. An iPhone 3GS owner pays $200 or $300 (I paid $430 btw) plus a steep monthly fee (2 years) which of course Apple gets a % of. Without a doubt 3GS owners are paying Apple minimum $500 dollars for the device and yet there are more advanced parts in a iPod Touch which they make less money off? Wow, just wow.

Not sure why you'd be mad. The Touch has always gotten the "newer/faster" hardware first. The pre-3G phones lagged behind the Touch in processing power. The GS now lags in WiFi and probably processing power also. It was only temporary that the 3GS leapfrogged over the Touch. It was going to get leaped over when the Touch came. ( 0.6-0.7 ounces heavier and 0.15 inches "deeper" isn't that much difference in costs. )


The power (CPU/Graphics/etc.) goes Touch first and then iPhone second.
It is the "phone" aspect that slaps a large price premium on the phone. Celluar data networks a more ubiquitous than WiFi ones. For that privilege you pay more money.

If Apple would just let the Touch have as much internal volume as the Phone it would always top the Phone on the "more horsepower" front. Instead get the thinner for no reasonable reason (from consumer point of view) and throttling of the Touch as an offering. [ e.g., slightly more volume likely would have been room for exact same camera as 3GS. ]

[twoodcc]

now this is great! now if only apple enables 802.11n, then the new touch would be worth upgrading to!

[NT1440]

What a coincidence, the wireless N spec has just been finalized.

Vandamn, just so you know, Apple hasn't gotten anything from monthly subscriptions since the first iphone....

[aznkid25]

It looks like the Wireless N requirement has been approved by the IEEE.

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9137918/IEEE_stamps_approved_on_802.11n_Wi_Fi_standard

So only the 3rd generation ipod touch will have wireless N? What about the 2nd generation ipod touch? Is there a different wireless chip?

[SpinThis!]

I could make my network N-only and make security a bit tighter.
How does making your network N only make "security tighter?" 802.11n isn't any more "secure" than other flavors using, say, WPA2 encryption. If a hacker wants to hack your network, they're going to do it no matter what flavor of wifi you have and whatever band you have (2.4 or 5 ghz). If you're worried about neighbors or passerbys not using N so you're "invisible" you're talking about security by obscurity—which is hardly much of a reason to upgrade... along the same lines of people who think turning off SSID broadcast makes them safer.

Apple should quit being so secretive.... they should say so and give us dates.
What do you want, a roadmap so Apple can tell everyone else when they're going to release new stuff? Great business plan...

[zonesey]

They offer it in their notebooks, so why stop now?



It's actually pretty nice, aside from the rolling shutter.




Apple had a paid "n" driver update for their MacBooks, why do you think they won't do it?



So longer range and better reception through and around obstacles aren't interesting benefits?

The truth is that in order to benefit from this kind of a MISO or MIMO system, the basestation transmitter has to be N-capable, meaning that it has to have more than one antenna with which to transmit. With clever planning, the reliability and the coverage of the link can be increased (without using any more band than before!). The catch is that you gotta have more than just 1 transmit antenna. So, for single antenna systems, N isn't really helping that much... Glad I got my D-Link with 3 antennas shoving bits into the channel at almost 60 Mbps.... :cool:

[archi17]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7C145 Safari/528.16)

Apple will definately charge for it in the 4.0 update. Why would Apple release it with extra features when they can milk their customers more later on?

[deconstruct60]

Based on this news and the production mishap, it is very clear that Apple fully intended to include a video camera (but not a still) in the iPod Touch..

But you'd get backlash if it doesn't do stills and substantially worse stills even if can hack a still out of the video camera. (would be similar to if the screen on the Touch was not quite as good as the iPhone. )


The nano's suspect (in terms of current mini vid cameras) records is "great" for the nano because it is 'extra'. Just a freebie thrown on so if catch between spending on a Flip and a iPod ... will get the iPod. As a Touch, the offereing would be priced higher than a Flip.

Also just because there is postage stamp area for the camera die doesn't mean it would have fit. still would have go get connectors back to the rest of the system. Some that works better in a mock up but not quite as well when physically cram everything in.

[droz]

Based on this news, the prototype and the production mishap, it is very clear that Apple fully intended to include a video camera (but not a still) in the iPod Touch.

I imagine an update will happen in the relative near future. Apple would love to be able to market that before Christmas rather than after.

Not going to happen. At this point Apple would have to eat serious crow to put a camera into the touch before 2010. Not to mention the consumers they would piss off that had bought the new one without the camera. Nope, I'd say end of 1Q10 at the earliest.

[Prenvo]

...give ya a nice new piece of hardware, and then totally not let you use it, or charge you more later on to use it.

LAME. If I could build a hackintosh phone, I would.

Or give you no new hardware and, uh, yeah. :/

[tabasco70]

were is the camera?;)

Wish there was one. Maybe next year.

[Jimmy James]

.

[SeaFox]

Update: iFixit has also revealed that there is a small empty space at the top of the device (approximately 6 mm x 6 mm x 3 mm) where an iPod nano-style camera could fit. The iPod touch does not appear to be thick enough to adequately house an autofocus camera as found in the iPhone 3GS.

Ha!

All that whining by you people for nothing! Even if they had included the camera, it would have been the nano's VGA resolution video-only camera, not the iPhone's camera, and you all would have been complaining because you couldn't take still pics with it.

[Lesser Evets]

If the new iPT had a Nanocamera and the ability to transmit FM to a car stereo, I would have paid $100 more than current prices and purchased one.

As it is, last year's model is fine for another year.

[Jack Flash]

So that's the production problem! Apple must have been working on a smaller auto-focus camera and had issues with it.

[ryan.stewie]

So that's the production problem! Apple must have been working on a smaller auto-focus camera and had issues with it.

There couldn't have been a production problem! There is no way Apple could remove cameras from manufacturing, remove all iPods with cameras from their stock, then produce thousands and thousands of units without cameras in just 2 weeks. The iPod touch was never going to have a camera.

[alent1234]

How does making your network N only make "security tighter?" 802.11n isn't any more "secure" than other flavors using, say, WPA2 encryption. If a hacker wants to hack your network, they're going to do it no matter what flavor of wifi you have and whatever band you have (2.4 or 5 ghz). If you're worried about neighbors or passerbys not using N so you're "invisible" you're talking about security by obscurity—which is hardly much of a reason to upgrade... along the same lines of people who think turning off SSID broadcast makes them safer.


What do you want, a roadmap so Apple can tell everyone else when they're going to release new stuff? Great business plan...

N is a much better protocol with less overhead and better security. With G there were issues in the protocol making very easy to crack even if you had wpa2

[puffnstuff]

So that's the production problem! Apple must have been working on a smaller auto-focus camera and had issues with it.

I was just going to post that. I think that is what happened. They were working on a good quality camera to fit that space. Whomever wasn't able to deliver in time. Instead of shoving the nano camera in there they said screw it.

[Brien]

The offending tweet:

News flash: The Touch has a Broadcom BCM4329FKUBG wireless chip, which supports 802.11n! Even the iPhone 3GS doesn't do that!

http://twitter.com/ifixit

They'd probably wait until the 4th gen. iPhone comes out, then enable it in both.

[commander.data]

They'd probably wait until the 4th gen. iPhone comes out, then enable it in both.
I agree. Including additional functionality in iPod Touches that are disabled on release is nothing new. Afterall, the 2nd gen iPod Touch had Bluetooth that wasn't enabled until iPhone OS 3.0, a $10 upgrade or now iPhone OS 3.1, a $5 upgrade. Similarly, 802.11n in the 3rd gen iPod Touch won't likely be enabled until iPhone OS 4.0 next June/July alongside the next iPhone that will also has 802.11n. I guess it's one way to encourage iPod Touch users to upgrade when a new major OS is released and means that the iPod Touch isn't at such a disadvantage compared to the iPhone by having it's refresh date in September of each year instead of June/July.

[dba7dba]

So that's the production problem! Apple must have been working on a smaller auto-focus camera and had issues with it.

Yes! So I will wait until they release itouch with camera.

Feel bad I can't have it now. Feel good I don't have to part with my $$$.

[dba7dba]

I wonder if the itouch case makers that made cases with holes for camera will be reimbursed by apple somehow. They obviously were led to make them by apple and now they will have to sit on a pile of them that they can't sell...

[Bevz]

Am patiently waiting for 802.11n to appear on the next iPhone revision... I'll be buying it in a heartbeat if it is... Hopefully this is an early sign that it's on it's way ;)

[chowmein]

Apple probably put N in because they knew that it would be approved soon. In fact, it was approved TODAY.

http://gizmodo.com/5357689/80211n-final-spec-is-final-finally

[samy88]

I agree with others. It looks like the latest touch has at least the potential to become a gadget I'd want to buy:

1. WiFi N. Why? Speed isn't the issue. Because at home I could make my network N-only and make security a bit tighter. I'd also be ready when b/g becomes rarer.

2. FM transmit. Like others, I don't want to klutz with some external gadget to play through speakers. If the chip can do it, why not do it?

3. FM receive. Less a big deal, but not a bad idea.

5. Microphone. For VoIP and voice notes on the go. Without it, even a used 1-G iPhone makes more sense.

6. A decent camera with still and video photography. Again, handy for notes on the go and times when I didn't know I needed a camera. If space is an issue, make the touch thicker and put a bigger battery in most of that space. No one complains about the iPhone being too thick, they won't mind a less thin touch, particularly with double the battery life.

As it stands now, buying the new touch makes little sense. I can get the same features in a used touch for less and more features in a used 1-g iPhone, also for less. That's particularly true of the low-end touch, which ships without the remote earphones with mike. That makes it's real price $230.

Apple should quit being so secretive. If the current models are merely interim to fill in until the real 3-G touches come along, they should say so and give us dates.


Although i agree with you that it might not be worthwhile for current ipod touch owners to upgrade to the 3rd gen, you shouldn't dismiss the value of buying the new one for those who have no ipoch touch yet.

Personally, as i live in Aus, if i buy a 2nd gen 32g ipod touch, that'd cost me about $320AU or more anyway, while the new one is priced at $399, which i can probably find at $390. Add in the price of purchasing earphones with a mic ($40, and which i really want) and your only spending like $30 extra to get the new one, which is faster as well.

So i do think buying this gen is worthwhile for people in my position.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

Apple says the 32 GB and 64 GB versions are faster, leading me to suspect their guts are from the iPhone 3G S.

If that's true, the touch could have a camera and a mic in the near future.

I'm sure someone will come up with a way to get a camera on the new touch.

[Powerbooky]

I love how people think N matters. I doubt most people have internet that is even near the max of wireless g, and even if you did you touch won't process web pages any faster. The device is a limitation, not the internet speed

Well... "N" does matter if it also means that we can use 5GHz instead of the overcrowded 2.4GHz wifi space. Besides, it also has a much better range which is more important I think.

[Brien]

^^According to iFixIt, it's got better guts than those in the 3GS.

[torbjoern]

Not going to happen. At this point Apple would have to eat serious crow to put a camera into the touch before 2010. Not to mention the consumers they would piss off that had bought the new one without the camera. Nope, I'd say end of 1Q10 at the earliest.

Why would it piss off the consumers if the touch got a cam by xmas? Technology evolves, and the iPhones would still be as good as before (spec-wise, that is). If it wasn't worth the money, why did they buy it in the first place?

I'm looking forward to the iPhone 4th gen.

[lostngone]

The Mighty Mouse has audio feedback. Try pressing the side buttons without plugging in the mouse and then press them with the mouse plugged in. Same with rolling the scroll ball.

Come on a speaker and the logic to make a clicking noise... You could do the some thing with a folded piece of stiff plastic. Apple had to have some other plan for it that didn't work out.

[wizard]

I'm not sure the N support means much speed wise. For one another antenna would be required. Also Apple doesn't run the G interface as fast as it could go to conserve battery power.

N does have low power modes that might come in handy but I'm not sure what the speeds are in that mode. In otherwords it is nice that there is an improved chip in the tablet but I'm not convinced it means a lot.

I'm actually a bit underwhelmed with the hardware on this device. I'm wondering if iFixit has figure out the RAM allotment? Maybe later.


Dave

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Gee, just wait until iPhone/Touch OS version 4.0 which will magically enable that 802.11N support for the low low cost of $10-20. As for the camera, Steve was afraid that raising the cost of the iPod Touch by an additional $20 (he wouldn't think of lowering the profit margin to cover it) would stop some people from buying it and so too freaking bad if you wanted a camera in the thing or a built-in microphone for Skype use. You're not going to get it...at least until the NEXT version. Expect a removable battery in about 12 years....

[knemonic]

I'm curious, is there any indication they changed the 8gb model in this update, hardware wise?

I was thinking about ordering a refurb model but it seams like they are neglecting to do a tear down of the 8gb model. If there is a difference between the two, I may be inclined to buy the new 8gb touch, not the older refurb 8gb touch.

In other posts, there have been talk about they did change the number scheme of the 8gb model, it is not a 3g, something along the lines of 2009fall model? This seems worth a tear down since it indicates something has changed, since it is not a 2gen anymore.

[JeffDM]

Also just because there is postage stamp area for the camera die doesn't mean it would have fit. still would have go get connectors back to the rest of the system. Some that works better in a mock up but not quite as well when physically cram everything in.

Now that I've had a bit more time to think of it, you're right, you would have to have evidence of unused connectors or a row or two of unused solder pads to reliably suggest that there was a plan for a camera but it was left out at the last moment, before the hardware went through the hardware equivalent of a "Golden Master".

[wizard]

I know about the phone approval time and I am not whining, I am just stating some opinions that I am sure I'm not the only with them.

What you are doing is a classic definition of whining.


By the way, I have a Wireless N router and would of loved for the 3GS to have the Wifi chip like the new Touch even if it would get activated on a future firmware update.

honestly I would love to have the option ofusing N on my older iPhone. Even if the chip was there though there is no assurance that the feature could be fully exploited. Generally full use of N requires another antenna.

What I don't get though is why everybody is up in arms over an N capable chip when the older hardware hardly fully exploits G.

But guess what, when that firmware comes out and activates the Wireless N for the Touch, us 3GS people aren't going to be able to enjoy it. What would we have to do to get Wireless N? Buy the next iPhone that does have it... that's why I am angry.

Again I'm stunned by your statement as it indicates a total lack of understanding with respect to the tech involved in building this hardware. Do you realize that a couple of years ago building iPhone at all wouldn't be possible? It is only the combination of advancements at ARM, Imagination and Samsung that permitted Apple to move forward with iPhone. Like wise with support chips such as the WiFi processor. Things move gently from R&D to production and in parallel standards get approved and software written. Each advancement from vendors like Broadcom allow Apple to move forward with new hardware designs.

Well most of the time. Obviously the missing camera is a glaring example of something leaving R&D a little to early.

In anyevent I still don't know what you are angery about. The very processes that made iPhone possible in the first instance are also the processes that gave us the fast 3GS and in this case a chip that supports N WiFi. It is called continous improvement the opposite of stagnation. For Apple to make you happy they would have to stop all development and shutdown the implementation of new chip technology. I for one don't want to see that.

In a nut shell your position, your anger is ridiculous.



Dave

[Evangelion]

Why not activate it now? But, its a good that they put a N capable chip in.

There might be driver-issues, or maybe issues with power-consumption. My bet is on the latter.

[CQd44]

There might be driver-issues, or maybe issues with power-consumption. My bet is on the latter.


Or they wanna charge you for it. ;]

[SpeedFleX]

Who knows maybe the N on the Touch is so Apple can stream HD content from iTunes, so it will be a portable ATV. Maybe like the ZuneHD

[lars666]

err... as hard as this may be to believe, sometimes you also transfer files from computer to computer within your own network...

and yes, when transferring a few gigs via wifi, I would much rather wait for a couple of minutes on N then for hours on G...


Where is this "transfer gigs of files via Wi-Fi from your computer to your iPhone" feature that Apple currently allows?

It's not about transfering from computer to iPhone, it's for example about transfering at home from wireless hard disk to computer which is slowed down from N to G speed because my iPhone also uses my WLAN. That's why it should have N standard. ALWAYS the same "clever" comments here à la: "Why N standard on the iPhone??? You can't use the speed anyway!!!" THAT is why - hope the next time people will finally remember that there are other set-ups out there where it INDEED makes a difference if your iPhone has G or N ...

[Vandam500]

What you are doing is a classic definition of whining.

honestly I would love to have the option ofusing N on my older iPhone. Even if the chip was there though there is no assurance that the feature could be fully exploited. Generally full use of N requires another antenna.

What I don't get though is why everybody is up in arms over an N capable chip when the older hardware hardly fully exploits G.


Again I'm stunned by your statement as it indicates a total lack of understanding with respect to the tech involved in building this hardware. Do you realize that a couple of years ago building iPhone at all wouldn't be possible? It is only the combination of advancements at ARM, Imagination and Samsung that permitted Apple to move forward with iPhone. Like wise with support chips such as the WiFi processor. Things move gently from R&D to production and in parallel standards get approved and software written. Each advancement from vendors like Broadcom allow Apple to move forward with new hardware designs.

Well most of the time. Obviously the missing camera is a glaring example of something leaving R&D a little to early.

In anyevent I still don't know what you are angery about. The very processes that made iPhone possible in the first instance are also the processes that gave us the fast 3GS and in this case a chip that supports N WiFi. It is called continous improvement the opposite of stagnation. For Apple to make you happy they would have to stop all development and shutdown the implementation of new chip technology. I for one don't want to see that.

In a nut shell your position, your anger is ridiculous.



Dave

Thanks for your post Dave. Puts things into perspective a little more. I appreciate it:)

[VenusianSky]

This is good news. 802.11N is suppose to be finalized this month, or by November. Plus the way broadband internet speeds are increasing, N will definetly come into use. However, as a previous post mentioned, N takes advantage of two antennas for I/O.

[MagnusVonMagnum]

What I don't get though is why everybody is up in arms over an N capable chip when the older hardware hardly fully exploits G.

Again I'm stunned by your statement as it indicates a total lack of understanding with respect to the tech involved in building this hardware.


It's pretty obvious you don't get it. What I don't get is why someone who clearly has no technical understanding of the issue has the nerve to attack someone else for their supposed lack of understanding on a tech issue (2nd statement).

Here's the deal. Any device on a "N" network that is a "G" device (such as the iPhone and iPod Touch) will *SLOW* down the entire "N" network such that actual "N" devices will not be able to operate at their maximum speeds. The losses are typically somewhere between G and N network speeds, but it's definitely significant if you're trying to exchange large files. For example, I often exchange large files between my PowerMac server in my den (which is wired via Gigabit to both of my N networks) and if I'm using the MBP over wireless N at the time, it will slow WAY down if my iPod Touch is on the same network. Notice that I said "networks" plural above. The reason I have TWO networks running is so that I can make one of them N ONLY and let the G devices connect to the other network. That way I never lose speed as the result of G devices being connected to the N only network.

So whether the iPhone or iPod Touch can make use of the extra bandwidth (in terms of drive speeds, etc.) is beside the point. It is the network device that determines whether or not your N network will be slowed down or not. It's very presence alone determines whether you are providing a bottleneck to your network or not. Being able to change the iPod Touch to a "N" device would eliminate that bottleneck for that device as it would no longer choke the life out of the N network just by being logged onto it.


In a nut shell your position, your anger is ridiculous.


I think people have a right to be upset that the new iPod Touch HAS the N chip in it but Apple has decided not to enable it. Why they have chosen that is unclear, but I wouldn't be surprised if it has something to do with charging iPod Touch users a fee later on (after enough people buy it without it) to enable it, like they did with a certain Macbook. You may not think that $5 (or whatever they might end up charging) is much money, but if you end up with 1 million new users in a year and charge them $5, you just made $5 million dollars for simply delaying the release of a feature that already exists in the product. In short, if Apple charges to enable that chip, they are basically just milking the user base once again. They COULD have put in a user replaceable battery, but why do that when they can make a small fortune and a new business from charging users $80 for a new battery install (which in some cases is almost half the value of the device to begin with at current prices...so why not just buy a newer iPod Touch instead??? Gee, that sounds like yet another attempt by Apple to force people to buy newer hardware (or pay through the nose to keep their old hardware; either way Apple WINS big time).

[Rocketman]

Double post, please delete this

[Rocketman]

http://blogs.zdnet.com/gadgetreviews/?p=2984&tag=btxcsim

Details about 802.11n capabilities of Broadcom chip.

Rocketman

[Rocketman]

Broadcom brochure for chip. (http://www.broadcom.com/products/Bluetooth/Bluetooth-RF-Silicon-and-Software-Solutions/BCM4329#tab=features-tab)


If you combine that link with this one:

Broadcom brochure for Bluetooth 3 and others. (http://www.broadcom.com/press/release.php?id=s378967)

You get statements that future standards are built into the current silicon.

Rocketman

[Shake 'n' Bake]

^^According to iFixIt, it's got better guts than those in the 3GS.

Hmm...

1080p playback, maybe?

FM tuner/transmitter...

I've noticed the iPT always has better specs than the contemporary iPhone. Hmm...

[Wi-Fi-Guy]

If they have the 4329 in them then why don't the devices support the 5GHz radio band? The 5GHz band allows wide channels which would double the throughput and probably save battery life when using Wi-Fi so why aren't the idiots at Apple using that band? The only way to get 50Mbps of actual 802.11n throughput on a single stream 802.11n device is on a wide channel in the 5GHz band. Apple has always been so forward thinking in terms of Wi-Fi, why are they crippling this device? Is it because they were unwilling to change the industrial design in order to fit a dual-band antenna into it? If so, that's just plain stupid.

[NathanA]

There couldn't have been a production problem! There is no way Apple could remove cameras from manufacturing, remove all iPods with cameras from their stock, then produce thousands and thousands of units without cameras in just 2 weeks. The iPod touch was never going to have a camera.

Well, then perhaps their decision to rip the camera out occurred much more than two weeks ago, and the news that they were having problems only trickled down to the public recently, well after it was already a done deal.

I mean, how else do you explain these pictures and videos (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/08/14/images-of-next-generation-ipod-touch-surface/)?

-- Nathan

[deconstruct60]

If they have the 4329 in them then why don't the devices support the 5GHz radio band? The 5GHz band allows wide channels which would double the throughput and probably save battery life when using Wi-Fi so why aren't the idiots at Apple using that band? The only way to get 50Mbps of actual 802.11n throughput on a single stream 802.11n device is on a wide channel in the 5GHz band. Apple has always been so forward thinking in terms of Wi-Fi, why are they crippling this device? Is it because they were unwilling to change the industrial design in order to fit a dual-band antenna into it? If so, that's just plain stupid.

Many of the home routers that use 5GHz ( Netgear 3000 series, Linksys , etc.) have multiple antennas. How are you going to do 2.5GHz and 5GHz wide spectrum on one antenna. To get more bandwidth with 11n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/802.11n#Number_of_antennas) often means more antennas.


5GHz is also going to draw more power. Something have of limited quantity on an handheld.

You can also run 11n in tthe 2.4-5 range.... you are just likely though to stomp on another transmit/receive service though.
5GHz is "better" because it is relatively unoccupied not because there is a more bandwidth up there. It is also handy if can use both 2.4 and 5 to spread conversations out to multiple devices ( so less partyline stomping on bandwidth).




I've actually been a bit surprised Apple has done as well building a decent radio on the iPhone. They've often done RF impeding things with their designs with laptops and desktops when it comes to WiFi. So much of the hype around the iPhone revolves around it not acting as a phone it is hard to tell if it is a really good phone/radio or not versus a very mediocre one with losts of stuff to take you attention away from that limitation. (http://www.smartdevicecentral.com/article/Apple+iPhone+3G/228425_2.aspx) In a quirky location probably more likely a good Motorola phone will do a better job than an iPhone. They have been building radios for a very long time.

[deconstruct60]

I
Here's the deal. Any device on a "N" network that is a "G" device (such as the iPhone and iPod Touch) will *SLOW* down the entire "N" network such that actual "N" devices will not be able to operate at their maximum speeds.


Even more true if throw an old 'b' device onto the network. ;)

However the following is of limited pragmatic use.

So whether the iPhone or iPod Touch can make use of the extra bandwidth (in terms of drive speeds, etc.) is beside the point. It is the network device that determines whether or not your N network will be slowed down or not. It's very presence alone determines whether you are providing a bottleneck to your network or not. Being able to change the iPod Touch to a "N" device would eliminate that bottleneck for that device as it would no longer choke the life out of the N network just by being logged onto it.


For a handheld, mobile device if the primary WiFi usage is in a carefully managed and limited client location (e.g., a house) .... what is the point??? Afraid of wires or what? It is like saying a cellphone that is used when standing less than a block away from a cell tower is the primary usage.

In a random coffeeshop/Internet cafe/Airport/etc hotspot ... you will have a wide variety of devices of different ages all using the network at the same time. "g" is the middle of the curve right now. Most likely the base station is capped at "g". Most likely the majority of the other devices are now "g" at this point. So if want to be part of the mainstream crowd than a "g".
[ not to say couldn't have a "power user setting" that kicked it up to "n" when knew was in a primary "n" setting and the utility as future proofed hardware when "n" becomes more ubquitous. ]




I think people have a right to be upset that the new iPod Touch HAS the N chip in it but Apple has decided not to enable it. Why they have chosen that is unclear, but I wouldn't be surprised if it has something to do with charging iPod Touch users a fee later on


That would be called being hustled. Sure folks would be pissed at that.
If N got turned on with a signficant 4.0 update ( N + 22 other updates ) for $10 I don't think folks would be as pissed. There is no reason that an update which still leaves "g" as the default setting and turns on optionally "n" would not be a 'major feature'. The hardware was already there. All needed to do is turn it on.

The bigger problem seems more likely is dealing with multiple "N" bands with the several other radios/antennas on a small device (and large amounts of metal casing limiting antenna function on the small space you do have. )

Even access points that do N and are in a random device network will likely segregate the "b" stuff to 2.4 and the "n" stuff to 5 to keep them from stomping on each other. That is yet another antenna or a dual/tri/quad purpose one for the iPhone/Touch .

[Rocketman]

Apple's Airport Extreme is dual band specifically to address this issue. Based on what I read today the new Broadcom chip in the iPod Touch 32/64 is dual band capable (simultaneously) as well as simultaneous BT 2 or 3 at the same time as 802.11 a/b/g and n.

So if you have a n router and an iPhone 2G enters the room on wifi then N keeps going but a/b/g lives on another frequency.

Whether n is able to be enabled in broadband mode in a handheld the size of a touch (or a Nano!!) is another issue.

I remember when n came out and you could order a MacPro with it. So I went to the parts department and saw the upgrade kit for a PowerMac to n. It is huge! And best factory installed.

If you get n at all in a handheld you should kiss the ground Apple "walks" on.

One upgrade option wanted on iPhone and iPod Touch. A double battery option for not much more thickness.

Rocketman

[compuguy1088]

Interesting that there's room for a camera in there. Seems to indicate the production problems might have been true or Apple decided to leave the camera for the next rev of the Touch.


As for the Wireless-N, they might not use that functionality since they'd need more antennas than B/G. So even if the chip supports it, Apple might just have used it because it had all the other features they needed and not for the N capability.

Personally, I think it has enough antennae, based on the fact that there are many routers that are n, and have only two external antennas. Heck my media center extender supports wireless n, and has only two antennas.

[ryan.stewie]

I don't care about a flimsy camera, i would like that FM receiver/transmitter enabled though. Its actually surprising to see how many people think 'production issues' were the cause of having no camera. Well, there are many holes in that theory, and I happen to believe what Steve Jobs said because it sounds more realistic.

[kk1ro]

I'm pissed.

I bought a 3GS thinking I was getting (on top of a great phone, portable GPS and PMP) a great gaming console but now Apple releases the CHEAPER touch3G that probably has a beefier CPU and GPU.
So, I payed double the price (in Portugal a 16GB 3GS costs 600€ w/o contract and the new 32GB touch3G costs 279€) to get a good phone, GPS and an always-online portable console and end up with inferior hardware. If the touch is "an iPhone without the phone" why the ***** does it get superior hardware? What do they expect us to do? Buy an iPhone and then buy the iPod touch to get the best graphical hardware?

It's not fair that the customers that pay the most and expect the most from their devices are the ones that get less.
Great way to treat your customers, Apple.

[Rocketman]

1. Heat budget.

2. Feature differentiation so that many customers will buy both.

Rocketman

[kk1ro]

1. Heat budget.

2. Feature differentiation so that many customers will buy both.

Rocketman

There's already enough differentiation as it is. Camera, microphone, GPS, compass, phone...
Why do they need to differentiate the CPU/GPU as well?
I really hope it's not a significant increase in speed or a new GPU altogether because that would be a dick move by Apple. Whether they want to admit it or not, there are a LOT of gamers who own the iPhone and they should not feel forced to buy the touch just to get the ultimate graphical experience.
The touch should be an iPhone without the phone as stated endlessly by Apple. It shouldn't have superior/faster hardware. Regardless of the way people try to spin it, it's not fair for iPhone users.

[kdarling]

The touch should be an iPhone without the phone as stated endlessly by Apple. It shouldn't have superior/faster hardware. Regardless of the way people try to spin it, it's not fair for iPhone users.

The problem is, the iPhone is also a ... phone.

The lack of a replaceable battery and/or the size of the battery, is probably the major factor in Apple's mind.

Same reason Apple leaves out multitasking. They think the user must be protected from themselves. Or rather, Apple must be protected. Think of the complaining if the phone only lasted one hour, while being as hot a game platform as the standalone touch.

[Wi-Fi-Guy]

Many of the home routers that use 5GHz ( Netgear 3000 series, Linksys , etc.) have multiple antennas. How are you going to do 2.5GHz and 5GHz wide spectrum on one antenna. To get more bandwidth with 11n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/802.11n#Number_of_antennas) often means more antennas.


5GHz is also going to draw more power. Something have of limited quantity on an handheld.

You can also run 11n in the 2.4-5 range.... you are just likely though to stomp on another transmit/receive service though.
5GHz is "better" because it is relatively unoccupied not because there is a more bandwidth up there. It is also handy if can use both 2.4 and 5 to spread conversations out to multiple devices ( so less partyline stomping on bandwidth).

Your grasp of radio physics is staggeringly inaccurate.

The number of antennas is due to the multi-radio configuration of multi-stream 802.11n device like the computers that have 802.11n. Single stream 802.11n only requires one antenna as long as that antenna is designed to resonate both 2.4GHz and 5GHz radio bands. Making an antenna which can do both is easy to do, it just requires a slightly larger antenna than one which only does 2.4GHz.

My guess is that this would have required them to make that little black plastic area on the back of the iPod Touch a bit larger and I'm sure Jonny Ive and his cooler-than-us minions in Apple's design group decided that it didn't look pretty enough when they were forced to make that black plastic patch larger so they didn't put a multi-band antenna in. Why they don't just put a plastic back on the thing like the iPhone has is completely mystifying.

Apple used to have a nice balance of engineering and industrial design but it looks like over the last couple of years that the designers insistence on what they think is pretty is winning out too much and this is a prime example of that.

And as for your power claim, 5GHz might only take more power given the same distance to an access point as a 2.4GHz device but given the fact that a 20MHz wide channel would allow you to transmit the same amount of data in half the amount the time, your claims of using more power are also spurious at best.

They have multi-band antennas in all of their computers and if they're offering a multi-band 802.11n chip now in their handheld products they should stop worrying about the black plastic window in the back not being pretty enough and widen it so accommodate a multi-band antenna. Crippling the products they offer us for the sake of aesthetics is moronic at best.

[wackymacky]

I'm not sure the N support means much speed wise. For one another antenna would be required. Also Apple doesn't run the G interface as fast as it could go to conserve battery power.

N does have low power modes that might come in handy but I'm not sure what the speeds are in that mode. In otherwords it is nice that there is an improved chip in the tablet but I'm not convinced it means a lot.

I'm actually a bit underwhelmed with the hardware on this device. I'm wondering if iFixit has figure out the RAM allotment? Maybe later.


Dave


If you run a G device on your network where there are two computers filesharing (or somthing like a :apple:TV running) at N speed the computers all drop thier speed down to g speed.

That's one of the drivers behind dual network routers.

[macintoshtoffy]

I love how people think N matters. I doubt most people have internet that is even near the max of wireless g, and even if you did you touch won't process web pages any faster. The device is a limitation, not the internet speed

'N' isn't just about speed - it is about range as well. I couldn't care less about speed; I have a big house and have more range to cover.

[MagnusVonMagnum]

If they have the 4329 in them then why don't the devices support the 5GHz radio band? The 5GHz band allows wide channels which would double the throughput and probably save battery life when using Wi-Fi so why aren't the idiots at Apple using that band? The only way to get 50Mbps of actual 802.11n throughput on a single stream 802.11n device is on a wide channel in the 5GHz band. Apple has always been so forward thinking in terms of Wi-Fi, why are they crippling this device? Is it because they were unwilling to change the industrial design in order to fit a dual-band antenna into it? If so, that's just plain stupid.

They don't even support the "N" mode of operation on the iPhone, so why even bother to bring up 5GHz? Apple IS forward thinking, though. All their regular Wi-Fi products (Airports, Apple TV, laptops) all support 5GHz operation. But like I said, you cannot judge the iPhone or iPod Touch's "N" capability when there is none (mode G only).


For a handheld, mobile device if the primary WiFi usage is in a carefully managed and limited client location (e.g., a house) .... what is the point??? Afraid of wires or what? It is like saying a cellphone that is used when standing less than a block away from a cell tower is the primary usage.


What is the point? You're joking, right? LOL. My primary use for my iPod Touch is as a Wi-Fi remote control for my whole house audio/video system. Even if I COULD connect via wire (how do you do that except for Syncing with iTunes???), why would I WANT to? Admittedly, I do dock it to a AC power supply at the main listening location because Wi-Fi eats up the battery fast, but when I roam to another room, it comes with me. It's unreasonable to try and wire a house for Ethernet in every room. I have four family/living rooms in my house. Two of them have Apple TV units and a third has an airport express. All of them have speakers (plus my den has THX Klipsch speakers connected directly to the PowerMac running the system so that's a 4th location. I may add more in the future, such as bedrooms and maybe even the outside deck where my grill and patio is. When my MBP is docked in my den, it IS connected via Gigabit Ethernet (I've got 4-port hub plus three on the router for a total of 6 available Gigabit connections in the den) as Gigabit gives me maximum transfer speeds (I do a LOT of large video file transfers between all three of my computers and speed is nice; N doesn't come close to Gigabit), but it IS a notebook computer and I can and do take it to other rooms at times and even out to the backyard patio. The same goes for the iPod Touch. That's the whole point of mobile Wi-Fi. I can move around without the need for wires. Now if you only have one computer and you do all your computing at your desk, then wired only makes sense, but otherwise, Wi-Fi is quite handy. In fact, as I said in an earlier post, I run TWO "N" networks in my house (one is high-speed only so "G" or "B" devices don't slow it down).

If you run a G device on your network where there are two computers filesharing (or somthing like a :apple:TV running) at N speed the computers all drop thier speed down to g speed.


That is not accurate either. They do not drop down to "G" speed. In fact, they end up somewhere in-between on average, but the N devices are slowed down compared to N only operation and quite frankly, N isn't fast enough for large files like video, IMO. On my gigabit network, my hard drive write speeds are the "slow" factor. When moving multiple 4GB files, no hard drive (or network if that weren't the limit) is fast enough for my tastes. I've got over 300 movies on my server plus dozens of home movies and they all had to be moved over from the machines doing the compression and editing. Try moving 4 movies over and suddenly you're waiting 10 minutes just to put them into iTunes.

[lostngone]

I'm pissed.

I bought a 3GS thinking I was getting (on top of a great phone, portable GPS and PMP) a great gaming console but now Apple releases the CHEAPER touch3G that probably has a beefier CPU and GPU.
So, I payed double the price (in Portugal a 16GB 3GS costs 600€ w/o contract and the new 32GB touch3G costs 279€) to get a good phone, GPS and an always-online portable console and end up with inferior hardware. If the touch is "an iPhone without the phone" why the ***** does it get superior hardware? What do they expect us to do? Buy an iPhone and then buy the iPod touch to get the best graphical hardware?

It's not fair that the customers that pay the most and expect the most from their devices are the ones that get less.
Great way to treat your customers, Apple.

So with your logic Apple should wait and sit on a product that is ready for release until it can upgrade all products in the same market? I am sure when they release the next iPhone it will be better and faster then the Touch. It is just how technology refresh works.

[Wi-Fi-Guy]

They don't even support the "N" mode of operation on the iPhone, so why even bother to bring up 5GHz? Apple IS forward thinking, though. All their regular Wi-Fi products (Airports, Apple TV, laptops) all support 5GHz operation. But like I said, you cannot judge the iPhone or iPod Touch's "N" capability when there is none (mode G only).

That's the whole POINT my friend. The 4329 is an "802.11n" (notice the lower case 'n' -- not upper case) chip which supports operation in both frequency bands but Apple has crippled the device in which they put the 4329 chip by only allowing it to operate in one of those two frequency bands. When they put the 4329 into the iPhone (which they likely will) and the iPhone supports only one of the two frequency bands supported by the 4329, that will be a real shame so I hope they don't cripple the iPhone into operating only in the 2.4GHz band the way that have apparently done with this new iPod Touch. There is hope though because the iPhone has a plastic back case unlike the Touch which is mostly metal. But then again in all of the iPhone teardowns I've seen the iPhone may not have enough room either for a dual-band antenna and if that's the case I would rather see Apple modify the industrial design slightly for future iPhones so we can have both frquency bands supported when they put the 4329 into it rather than crippling future iPhones just to preserve their ostensibly sacrosanct industrial design. I mean the current Wi-Fi chip in the phones is an a/b/g chip and they don't support the 5GHz band and that is just a complete bummer. Hopefully they'll learn from the obvious mistakes they made in choosing design over function in this new Touch and not make the same mistake with the next generation iPhone.

[helmsc]

This is good news. 802.11N is suppose to be finalized this month, or by November. Plus the way broadband internet speeds are increasing, N will definetly come into use. However, as a previous post mentioned, N takes advantage of two antennas for I/O.

It was ratified Friday according to the IEEE site (http://standards.ieee.org/announcements/ieee802.11n_2009amendment_ratified.html)

[xhArRiSoNxD]

Not sure if anyone already posted this but I stopped reading at the 3rd page.

Do you guys remember when the 2G iPod touch came out? It had a Bluetooth chip inside and was not active when it was first released. I think when 3.0 came out it the functionality was released inside the hardware. So what I think is that the 802.11N capabilities and the FM transmitter may be released in a later firmware update in the future to all the people that have doubts. Although it may have dramatic effects on the battery, so does high intensity apps like Real Racing, etc..

So maybe when 4.0 comes out you may see this added in an update!

I sure hope it is.. I mean if its there why not use it. =]

x hArRiSoN :apple: