Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Anyone else think 64GB is now likely?
- Thread starter PDFierro
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Like I wrote before, my iPhone is my one and only music player. I want all my music on it for that reason alone. Whether I'm at the gym, walking on a beach in Europe, on a flight with no wifi, a NYC subway, I want my music (all my music) at my fingertips.
Keep in mind to make use of iCloud you will need access to the web. There are plenty of times where I don't have any internet access (cellular or wifi) and iCloud will be useless to me with respect to accessing my music. Hence why I want and need all my music with me in general.
Instead of having to select a portion of my collection to add to my current iPhone, I want it to be routine that I just add everything one time and add new music when necessary. It's inevitable that this opportunity will come in due time with the iPhone. Hopefully this fall.
----------
I'm sure others are in your boat, but this definitely is not my situation. I have 118 apps on my iPhone and 17 of those are games. But I don't think any of my games are as big Fifa. All my apps combine for 4 GB. The rest is my music. No videos.
Some people load their iDevices with large apps (like games), others like me have a lot of apps but way fewer games which means less space taken up. That said I still want 64 GB so I can simply dump my music collection on my phone.
Last edited:
That's great if you have a nice data plan to support that. Not everyone does. I have the 200MB data plan because where I live we are limited to Edge speeds. It's much quicker just to use my Wifi for everything and use my data on the go for things like facebook and such. The infrastructure for it is not ready yet. In a few years? Sure. Just not this second.
And why would someone thumb down my post? Facts are facts, sorry.
I want a 128GB. 64GB wouldn't even hold my music
Even with icloud, the device still needs space for the temp files/stream. Plus it seems to run quicker with more free space. I'm always living on the edge of capacity and it seems to be running slower this way
Even with icloud, the device still needs space for the temp files/stream. Plus it seems to run quicker with more free space. I'm always living on the edge of capacity and it seems to be running slower this way
It seems a bit early, but then again I've seen apps reaching up ti a gigabyte so it might be considerable for Apple.
Now that most Androids and Blackberries come with 8gb mem + SD for 32gb.
I think 64 would yet again put Apple on the top of that department.
Now that most Androids and Blackberries come with 8gb mem + SD for 32gb.
I think 64 would yet again put Apple on the top of that department.
128GB wouldn't be enough to hold my music. There has never been a portable device that had the capacity to hold my entire collection so I stopped waiting for that larger device. It gets to a point where the sheer number of artists, albums, and tracks makes it cumbersome to browse my collection. There aren't any apps for the iPod/iPhone that make it easier to browse large collections.
That is why I make heavy use of playlists, smart playlists, and genius mixes. I stopped wanting to have my entire collection with me and switched to selecting a subset of my collection that I'm more likely to want to listen to.
Same， I have around 200 songs and I can refresh and just use 50 songs. 128 GB is way to much. Its the apps that take up space like Fifa 11 1GB. Fortunately not many apps are like Fifa 11...so far.
Apple's iOS and Apple's app store is what keeps people sticking to the iPhone.
You are only in the minority of people that want over 32 GB and will move to Android if there is no 64GB model. Sure majority of macrumors may want
６４ ＧＢ ｂｕｔ ｔｈｅ ａｖｅｒａｇｅ ｃｏｎｓｕｍｅｒ ｄｏｅｓｎ＇ｔ ｎｅｅｄ ｍｏｒｅ ｔｈａｎ １６ＧＢ ａｎｄ ３２ ＧＢ ｉｓ ａ ｌｕｘｕｒｙ．
Ｙｏｕｒ ｓｔａｆｆ ｍｕｓｔ ｈａｖｅ ｖｅｒｙ ｈｉｇｈ ｍｏｒａｌｅ
a 128GB touch would be incredible! I think there are now smaller memory die's (or whatever the memory things are called). But even if they did exist at the necessary size to get 64GB of memory, we have to keep in mind how much of a price difference this would make
lol, what? it's the ipod. the classic is almost dead, and a 128GB touch would kill the classic.
A 128GB iPhone/iPod touch would cost a lot of money, hell, Apple still want £400 or so for an 8GB iPhone 3GS :|
64GB ipod touch currently costs $399. Usually the past has shown that they will increase storage while keeping the relative cost the same. So it'd probably be 128GB for $400. Storage is always dropping in cost.
Maybe it's incorrect to assume that but it's a totally logical price for a 128gb touch.
I don't think we'd see one until the iPhone got 64GBs though.
my assumption is based on at least 15 years working on computers, *shrug* You may not agree with that, but it's not incorrect. It may turn out to be, but for now it's an assumption.
Apple is always doing things to try to compete. Look at the AppleTV2. more functionality, smaller size, drop in price.
iPhone = every year a better phone, more storage, more features, and the highest storage version is always $299 on contract.
My answer is based on similar length of experience, although I apparently pay more attention than you to spot pricing of memory modules. Based on variables in supply and demand, several times in the past decade memory prices have increased. (one would think that if you truly worked on computers for the last 15 years as you say that you would have noticed the occasional price increase)
Oh, and I pay attention to the storage available on iPhone models.
iPhone ≠ more storage every year. There was no storage increase from the iPhone 3GS to the iPhone 4.
Last edited: