Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Cameras Ordered for iPod Touch? Another Case Design

Wilkinsons said:
True, but I was actually thinking about the fact that A-GPS isn't the same as a "normal" Tom-Tom GPS since they need (according to wiki):

"An A-GPS receiver can address these problems in several ways, using network elements such as either an assistance server or other data from a network. That assistance generally falls into two categories: a) information used to more quickly acquire satellites, or b) calculations done remotely:"

So, if the incorporate a GPS, will it be a A-GPS or something more fancy? OR will they need, at least some contact with a working wlan network to work fluently... which of course will not happen in a moving car for example.
Click to expand...

A-GPS still works without a cell signal. You won't get as refined of a position as you would with the assist from the cell towers but it will locate you.
 
Warbrain said:
A-GPS still works without a cell signal. You won't get as refined of a position as you would with the assist from the cell towers but it will locate you.
Click to expand...

How on earth does a cell signal increase the accuracy of GPS devices? Maybe it'll increase the cold lock-on time very very slightly, but even this has been pretty pointless for a fair few years with any partially decent gps chipset.
I don't have an iphone or know anything about its gps quality, but I've had old gps devices with sirfstarIII chips and the idea that a cell/wifi/whatever signal would increase its accuracy seems pretty laughable.

I havn't really read this thread through so I'm probably repeating others, but maybe tomtom need to add another gps chip to get any sensible accuracy over a 'spec sheet gps chip'. Maybe they're just adding an antennae, and/or just trying to produce a very cheap product for no other reason than profit.
If you've followed air/land gps navigation software over the years, or even just looked at their code, tomtom are hardly the most competent company about - their end products work and sell well though, and having turn by turn etc apps on the iphone seems like such a no brainer I really was surprised that there hasn't been decent solutions since the first model's release, overpriced windscreen suckerpad holder or not.
 
talkingfuture said:
I'd like to see the new iPod nano and Touch have GPS. Not for navigating or mapping applications, but as a replacement for Nike+. I could go biking, hiking or running and download what I've done at the end of the day. That would be cool. Nike+ is great if you're running in Nike shoes but not so great if you do other sports or wear other trainers.
Click to expand...

I agree. I have a 2g touch and was planning on skipping this year's and just buying the 4g next year. But if they put a GPS in it so I can use the tracking apps (that are more accurate than Nike+ and don't require Nike+ shoes or a shoe pouch that reduces accuracy even further...not to mention the sensor itself with its non-replaceable battery), then I might have to give the 3g some serious consideration.

A camera would just be a bonus, since my phone also has a camera. Granted, it would be much easier to get the pictures off an iPod than it is to get them off my phone.
 
VoR said:
How on earth does a cell signal increase the accuracy of GPS devices? Maybe it'll increase the cold lock-on time very very slightly, but even this has been pretty pointless for a fair few years with any partially decent gps chipset.
I don't have an iphone or know anything about its gps quality, but I've had old gps devices with sirfstarIII chips and the idea that a cell/wifi/whatever signal would increase its accuracy seems pretty laughable.

I havn't really read this thread through so I'm probably repeating others, but maybe tomtom need to add another gps chip to get any sensible accuracy over a 'spec sheet gps chip'. Maybe they're just adding an antennae, and/or just trying to produce a very cheap product for no other reason than profit.
If you've followed air/land gps navigation software over the years, or even just looked at their code, tomtom are hardly the most competent company about - their end products work and sell well though, and having turn by turn etc apps on the iphone seems like such a no brainer I really was surprised that there hasn't been decent solutions since the first model's release, overpriced windscreen suckerpad holder or not.
Click to expand...

Triangulation. You are able to get some sort of location based upon what towers you're connected to. That's how the original iPhone is able to determine a location but not a very good accurate location. Skyhook also helps as it uses nearby wireless networks to locate you.

A-GPS utilizes the cellular network to get the location. It will work fine without a cellular connection but may not get as accurate of a location as it would with cellular reception.

See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGPS
 
Having just bought a refurb 2G Touch, I am so in the queue to buy one with a camera!

However, I'll probably wait for the 4G, because money is tight. I didn't think I'd love my Touch as much as I do, but a camera would be *sweet*.

Oh, and Pugpuppydude is right, thank heavens for translation difficulties! :D :D
 
Regarding A-GPS, The difference between an A-GPS and a regular GPS is that the former is Assisted by the cell network to find the satellites, making the initial locating much faster, but otherwise it's the same thing as a GPS, same accuracy and all
 
Small White Car said:
I've always said that the iPod Touch really should be an "iPhone without a phone."

Yes, a lot of people call it that, but I mean it literally. GPS, camera...everything.

Apple hasn't agreed with me so far, so I'm not saying this case is real. But it would be nice.
Click to expand...

+1. Living in a deadzone, I rarely use the "phone" part of my iPhone and so have resisted the hardware upgrades. And I do have other cell phones that I carry at least one of in my purse or car when travelling. The iPhone is always with me, but gets used as an iPod touch MOST of the time. So I am always interested in the next iPod touch.... camera sounds like a great option.
 
C'mon on yall you know this is going to happen. It s too obvious! And what makes me shake my head is that Sony should have seen this coming and one up Apple. Look at the psp and tell me why the hell didn't Sony release that tiny usb camera for it? I heard it was out in Japan. Now the iphone 3GS has a high quality 3 meg pix camera, does games like a mutha etc. Apple is doing it baby! And the competition is being left in the dust. By start of next year Sony will muster up the balls and do video/camera on one of their mp3 players. And don't let me start on the Zune.
 
if they are going to put a camera in it either put the 3GS cam or don't bother.

I for one will use the camera especially if it's good quality
 
fabianjj said:
Regarding A-GPS, The difference between an A-GPS and a regular GPS is that the former is Assisted by the cell network to find the satellites, making the initial locating much faster, but otherwise it's the same thing as a GPS, same accuracy and all.
Click to expand...
QFT. Please, there was a whole thread or five or twenty dedicated to the argument of how A-GPS works. It uses cellular or wifi triangulation to allow it to quickly find the satellites and lock on to your position much faster, but doesn't absolutely require any data connection to work (obviously Google Maps does, but if you were to have an offline maps app, it would be great).

Regarding the "iPhone without the phone," I know people who might love to get a Touch if it had a mic/earpiece so they could use it as a Skype or similar VOIP device, not only because they're at the limits or outside AT&T's (or any GSM) coverage area but it would be great overseas.

As for the camera, I would think it would be in the same spot as the iPhone, but I don't know how the Touch is put together, so maybe it's different enough that they'd have to put it in the middle. But I don't think these case manufactures are the best source of rumors as of late. :)
 
Shookster said:
Why?
Click to expand...

im guessing because it's a lot and it's closer to the amount of ipods the sell than computers(the only other product these could be applies to...right?). Apple probobly/definately sells more ipods than computers.
 
So many cases with holes all over the place. None of them are in the same place. Which one will be correct. No one knows. Time to pre-order Who's with me????
 
buckyballs said:
I'm going to don my skeptic hat.

I don't think Apple would have sent the designs to the case manufacturers early enough for cases to be finished already ( > 2 months before expected announcement)
Click to expand...

Maybe Apple isn't going to wait until September this year. Maybe they've done some analysis and believe there is an advantage to releasing in August, or even late July. Or maybe the new designs are ready to go.
 
apfhex said:
As for the camera, I would think it would be in the same spot as the iPhone, but I don't know how the Touch is put together, so maybe it's different enough that they'd have to put it in the middle. But I don't think these case manufactures are the best source of rumors as of late. :)
Click to expand...

These case manufacturers had made cases that matched up exactly to the iPod nano's most recent revision well before it was released. In terms of body changes they can be right and have been in the past. But it's still worth being skeptical.
 
The iPod camera should be off the unit

Apple should make the camera separately as a wireless bluetooth item for the iPod or iPhone. People could then use the iPhone or iPod as backup cameras for their cars, bicycles, or motorcycles/RV's or for amateur short distance sleuthing.
 
Padraig said:
Great; not alone can't i bring my phone into my gym, I won't be able to bring in any future iPods* also.:mad:


*Refusing to buy the new style shuffle.
Click to expand...

Just put it in a different case when you go to the gym and say it's a first gen.
 
Apple has confused a lot of people about what A-GPS is

Warbrain said:
A-GPS still works without a cell signal. You won't get as refined of a position as you would with the assist from the cell towers but it will locate you.
Click to expand...

A-GPS requires a connection to get to an assistance server. So strictly speaking, without a cell signal the iPhone A-GPS reverts to regular GPS. Locating will be just as precise either way, since on the iPhone, the assistance is only the initial satellite orbits etc... after that, it's also just regular GPS.

A Touch with GPS could access assistance over WiFi, perhaps, instead.

Warbrain said:
Triangulation. You are able to get some sort of location based upon what towers you're connected to. That's how the original iPhone is able to determine a location but not a very good accurate location. Skyhook also helps as it uses nearby wireless networks to locate you.
Click to expand...

Right, but cell and WiFi id are other locating methods. They are not part of A-GPS. When used together with GPS or A-GPS, the combination is called a hybrid locating system. AFAIK, each method is still independent in the iPhone, however.

fabianjj said:
Regarding A-GPS, The difference between an A-GPS and a regular GPS is that the former is Assisted by the cell network to find the satellites, making the initial locating much faster, but otherwise it's the same thing as a GPS, same accuracy and all
Click to expand...

True for the iPhone, but A-GPS can mean different things. For example, for many years Verizon dumbphones have had A-GPS for E911 and VZNavigator, but most of them cannot act in totally standalone mode. Some even pass off all calculations to the network.

apfhex said:
QFT. Please, there was a whole thread or five or twenty dedicated to the argument of how A-GPS works. It uses cellular or wifi triangulation to allow it to quickly find the satellites and lock on to your position much faster,
Click to expand...

In the iPhone, A-GPS goes to an assistance server when necessary to quickly get initial satellite orbits, status, time, etc... and yes, perhaps an initial position guess. After that, it's basic GPS.

The folks behind Skyhook have come up with a combination method that does use cell id and WiFi to help get quicker GPS locks, but I don't think the iPhone uses it yet (otherwise they'd be advertising it). Especially since the cell id is done by Google at this time. IF Apple is using the new method, I'd love to know about it.
 
I can totally see this happening and I think it is a good idea. Look out Flip HD cameras haha! :p

I want Apple to make the iPhone and iPod Touch screens 16:9 aspect ratio now for crying out loud and then add HD video capture and OLED. COME ON APPLE! It makes no sense to have a screen that is not true widescreen with all these video features! :rolleyes:
 
peterdevries said:
I'm disputing that. There are several other differences in design between the Touch and the iPhone (most notably the back material). In addition, the Touch is extremely tapered and thin. It's quite possble that there is not enough room to put the camera in the same position as it is in the iPhone.
Click to expand...

A camera could easily fit on the edge of the incredibly thin iPod touch.

Look at the iSight inside the MacBook Air; that screen should not be able to house a camera, yet Apple has done it ... as usual...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back