iPhone 4's 5MP Camera Won't Fit in Current iPod Touch Design

[merlinw]

If I were in charge I'd just make the darned thing thicker and put both cameras in.

But based on my experiences with this company, I'm officially predicting that they'll give the iPod the front-facing camera but not the rear camera. Too bad.

Most likely the new iTouch will be the same form factor as the iPhone 4.
Saves on costs.

 

[happy21]

obviously it wont have iphone 4 design because apple wants to differentiate their product.

 

[merlinw]

They don't have to stay with that design. it's more than likely going to change to the block style the 4 has. I also don't think they will have facetime since it uses the SMS/text system to initiate "calls" which wouldn't work on a cell free device.

I think Apple WILL have Facetime built in. Afterall, it is WiFi only.

 

[miki66]

if somehow it fits, which one should i buy, iphone4 or itouch

 

[puffnstuff]

I hope it's going to get the 5mp cam that would be great if they redesigned it to fit.

I'm not a phone person and if the touch didn't exist it's not like I would run and get an iPhone.

Apple could give the same features in the touch as in the iPhone as long as it doesn't have the essential phone function I don't see how it can hurt sales.

 

[e-coli]

Apple realized it was stupid with the nano, and that it's not worth it.

Oh really?

 

[chatin]

Why wouldn't it fit? Doesn't look all that big to me from what I've seen....

The old form factor is stacked with a thin logic board between the battery and the screen.

The new design has a much thicker, but smaller, logic board side by side with an enormous battery.

 

[NT1440]

The old form factor is stacked with a thin logic board between the battery and the screen.

The new design has a much thicker, but smaller, logic board side by side with an enormous battery.

What does that have to do with the A4 though? What prevents apple from doing a different logic board layout than the iP4?

 

[merlinw]

At Apple's margins, that iPod Touch would be priced at $600 to $700 (USD), same as an iPhone. No one would buy them at that price.

Plus they're manufacturing iPhone 4's as fast as they can already, so adding demand isn't going to make them any cheaper.

Apple isn't going to price an iPod Touch cheaper without doing something to cut their costs, it sells really well priced at $200 to $300, so they're going to have to leave something major out. And just leaving out the cellular radio chips is probably not enough, especially if they are replaced by more or larger flash chips.

I think Apple is going to place the iTouch a bit cheaper than the iPad. Sort of a mini iPad. With 3g support, 2 cameras, and GPS. Cost around $400 for the 32 gig model.

 

[schenk]

this might have already been said, but i didn't read everything.

Wouldn't the new iPod touch just follow the iPhone 4? i'm sure it would have some sort of camera, with a retina display, a gyroscope, bigger battery, and the a4 possessor. It just makes sense because its always followed the iPhone hasn't it?

 

[Jacob1447]

the ipod touch is due for a new design as the last two generations were identical design-wise. I doubt Apple will make it thicker to put in the 5MP camera. Apple doesn't like to compromise any aspect of a product to put in a new feature. We'll see though. Obviously I hope Apple puts the camera in. I think that the new ipod touch will for sure have a front facing facetime camera, maybe a video camera like in the nano, and a slight chance of having the 5MP camera.

 

[schenk]

Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnusVonMagnum View Post
Why don't they stop playing games and just use ONE CASE for BOTH? Save money on manufacturing by combining operations and give the same features. In fact, an iPhone that isn't activated should be an iPod Touch and vice versa. Then you never have to choose later.

Uh... the GSM radios take up space and cost money. Why should someone who wants to carry only an iPod need to lug around a thicker than necessary device?

Also the price would be a lot more for an ipod touch....

 

[NT1440]

the ipod touch is due for a new design as the last two generations were identical design-wise. I doubt Apple will make it thicker to put in the 5MP camera. Apple doesn't like to compromise any aspect of a product to put in a new feature. We'll see though. Obviously I hope Apple puts the camera in. I think that the new ipod touch will for sure have a front facing facetime camera, maybe a video camera like in the nano, and a slight chance of having the 5MP camera.

Don't forget that the 3G was technically thicker than the original iphone. Sometimes apple just does what they need to do.

 

[iMichaela]

Agreed. Some people need to use a case anyway just to make them easier to hold on to... That wouldn't be a bad thing at all if they were 1mm bigger. Although something tells me Apple has something pretty insane up their sleeve.

Like an evil scientist!! Mwahaha!

 

[Repo]

Maybe people will finally stop calling it the "iTouch" ...ugh.

Inorite?

Stop thinking of "plug-in" devices. When has Apple ever released anything like that? When has any tech company released anything like that?

Would Apple do it? Very unlikely. Has it been done before? Yes.

 

[CalebF]

From a manufacturing stand point, it makes sense.

 

[na1577]

Would Apple do it? Very unlikely. Has it been done before? Yes.

Hmm, that's very interesting. I think the closest thing to that for 3G would be a MiFi. Which is, of course, already available, so I don't see what that other poster is talking about.

 

[thleeal]

Most likely the new iTouch will be the same form factor as the iPhone 4.
Saves on costs.

wrong. ur talking about risking serious cannibalisation. the ipod touch wont follow the iphone 4's line, it will follow the ipad's.

ipod touch is not marketed as a convergence device device its a gaming device, otherwise why pay 500£ for a phone and contract when you could just get an ipod and a 100£ phone that calls and does text. it dosent make sense. either way it wont have the same 5 mp camera maybe the forward facing and the 3gs camera too. but forget things like gps and using it as a an AR device.

recently the price came out for what the iphone costs to build, Apple have high margins, do the math, it wouldn't work. you cant have an iphone 4 designed ipod with all of the formers features.

when hope seems too good to be true, use logic to to confirm.

.T

 

[pika2000]

Imo Apple needs to step up the iPod Touch. Stop obsessing about the thinness. If Apple can put in the same 5MP 720p camera as the iPhone 4 into the next Touch, add also stereo mic and bundle iMovie with it, Apple can put a serious competition for the Flip video cam. Really, it could probably destroy all the flip cam devices altogether.

But I have a feeling Apple would stay on the gaming aspect of the next Touch, just adding a gyroscope and the front facing camera (there's a reason why Jobs said 10s of millions of Facetime devices by the end of the year). I have a feeling the next iPod lineup would be even more disappointing than the last (I mean what else can Apple do on the nano/Classic/shuffle?)

 

[thleeal]

Why don't they stop playing games and just use ONE CASE for BOTH? Save money on manufacturing by combining operations and give the same features. In fact, an iPhone that isn't activated should be an iPod Touch and vice versa. Then you never have to choose later. The problem is that Steve's obsession with "thin" will not allow him to choose power over thin. Witness the waste of time known as the Macbook Air. A netbook would have been a much better direction. Nope, make it thinner, not smaller. Witness the new Mac Mini...thinner and still powered by mobile parts (and they call it a "desktop" ???). The one machine that was designed for power hasn't been updated in over a year and is now hopelessly underpowered and insanely overpriced. I think the reason the Mac Vs. PC ads ended is that Steve has conceded the home computing market to the PC. Now all you see is iPad and iPhone ads. The Mac is nowhere to be found.

muppet.
1.the two products are entirely different
2.MBookAir is an awesome computer, it fitted in with the needs of the day, it was loong before netbooks, and FAR more powerful. a prestige product that those who could afford would carry around. not a piece of **** that a 6 year old could afford.
3. the Mac Mini is a HTPC not a desktop < do you expect it to have quad core and a graphics card that is bigger than its current form factor.
4. i am sick of hearing this right now, MP is due for a refresh, come at me with the same argument after refresh.
5. i products are star products, there also relatively revolutionary they want to promote those first and foremost. so when people go to the apple site or apple store they will see the advertising for macs, quite clever really. ever think there dying down advertising macs because of a major refresh that will come to the system, and pow they got u wanting more overpriced **** u dont need.

next please.
Post S im not a fanboy, i use windows and non i products where they are better. but as a business you see alot of copying of them in the business world. now do u still think ur wrong?

 

[Repo]

Hmm, that's very interesting. I think the closest thing to that for 3G would be a MiFi. Which is, of course, already available, so I don't see what that other poster is talking about.

A MiFi would work perfectly, granted Apple doesn't devise a way to keep you from doing that.

As for the new iPod Touch, it makes perfect sense for Apple to give it all the same features as the current iPhone. The argument against such a plan being: the Touch will cannibalize iPhone sales. Personally, I don't see how.

People who want an all-in-one device, will get the iPhone.
People who aren't looking for a phone, but want the best multimedia device on the market, will get the Touch.

With the new iPhone camera in the Touch, it will also serve as tough competition for Flip video cameras and digital still cameras, both of which, mind you, don't have monthly contracts.

 

[tadad1]

Because I can not think of the last time Apple made a product BIGGER than a previous version. (Without drastically changing its form, that is. And I don't see how that can happen with an iPod Touch.)

Seriously. Has it EVER happened? You're the one going against history. I'm not saying your're wrong, but your idea is the longer shot. Not theirs.

iPod touch 1st generation:
4.3 in (110 mm) (h)
2.4 in (61 mm) (w)
0.31 in (7.9 mm) (d)

iPod touch 2nd/3rd generation:
4.3 in (110 mm) (h)
2.4 in (61 mm) (w)
0.33 in (8.4 mm) (d)

 

[afireintonto]

Would it really matter if the touch was a few mm thicker? The kids that get it will be too busy taking pictures and using face time to sext to notice.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

muppet.
1.the two products are entirely different

Yes, they are entirely different. They just happen to have the same basic dimensions, same basic look, same basic operating system and run the same basic applications. You're right. They're NOTHING alike.

Muppet
2.MBookAir is an awesome computer, it fitted in with the needs of the day, it was loong before netbooks, and FAR more powerful. a prestige product that those who could afford would carry around. not a piece of **** that a 6 year old could afford.

I suggest you look at history if you think netbooks didn't exist when the Macbook Air came out because you are just flat out wrong. Some say the first netbook was the OLPC (One Laptop Per Child) in 2005. Wikipedia's take is that they first appeared in 2007. Either way, the MBA was released in 2008. It is more powerful than most netbook sized computers, but it's underpowered and overpriced (especially the first version) for a notebook. Whether it's awesome or not is purely a personal opinion. I say not as it's unnecessarily and obsessively thin like everything Steve pushes and that aspect is a 1:1 correlation as to why such products are typically so underpowered. Given the MBA's original price, it should have been Apple's most powerful computer ever. It was an overpriced toy for frail eldery people that could not lift a lousy regular Macbook (not heavy). The screen's dimensions were no smaller so the ONLY savings were from being thin (and that was then bested shortly thereafter by a PC competitor). Most people saw no need for the machine and for a company that normally HATES to cannibalize sales from another machine, this one was a WHOPPER in that it has no space saving advantages like a netbook or even the iPad and yet underwhelms in every other sense unless you are impressed by "thin" or think paying twice as much for less power is a cool thing to have just to save a couple of pounds.

MuppeT
3. the Mac Mini is a HTPC not a desktop < do you expect it to have quad core and a graphics card that is bigger than its current form factor.

The Mini has NEVER been marketed as a home theater PC. It has absolutely no software to even SUGGEST that Apple EVER had that in mind (i.e. Front Row is hopelessly outdated; iTunes does not support most HD rentals for non-Apple TV machines including the Mini and Blu-Ray support is nowhere to be found on ANY Mac). The Mini was marketed originally an entry-level desktop Mac that the masses could afford, not a HTPC. If this is a HTPC, it's that in the minds of those trying to justify its existence. To everyone else, it's just another expression of Steve's obsession with completely unnecessary thinness, especially given it IS marketed as a "desktop" machine and yet uses mobile/Macbook parts.

MUUUUPPPEEEET

4. i am sick of hearing this right now, MP is due for a refresh, come at me with the same argument after refresh.

So you being sick of hearing it makes it any less true? Even if the Mac Pro was up-to-date, it's still the only true "desktop" Mac and yet is priced squarely in the workstation level arena. This leaves Apple with an obvious gaping hole where the true consumer level desktop should be. iMacs and Mac Minis don't cut it given their mobile parts. Pretty doesn't make up for power ever. Yet Apple wasted its time and resources on the Macbook Air which clearly overlaps their entire notebook range while they have no true consumer desktop models what-so-ever to offer in the PC's largest consumer computing arena for desktops. It is mind blowing that even Steve could overlook such a huge gap in the lineup, but then he is so obsessed with thin and cares so little for gaming that he probably truly believes that market doesn't matter and that an iMac is "good enough" for "truckers" while the iPad is good enough for everyone else. Sadly, he's wrong.

5. i products are star products, there also relatively revolutionary they want to promote those first and foremost. so when people go to the apple site or apple store they will see the advertising for macs, quite clever really. ever think there dying down advertising macs because of a major refresh that will come to the system, and pow they got u wanting more overpriced **** u dont need.

If you think a few product ads on Apple's web site is comparable to mass market advertising, think again. Their mass ad campaign for Mac Vs. PC was very successful, but it wasn't removed for any clever reason. It was removed because Steve isn't interested in home computers these days. He's obsessed with the iPhone and iPad and iOS in general. It's all we saw at the developer conference. It's all Apple is pushing anymore and companies like Microsoft are certainly not taking a nap while Apple takes a break from real computers and plays with gadgets and toys. Letting Microsoft catch up to or even soon pass up OSX in the mean time is a mistake that Apple will one day regret. There is no excuse for ignoring one market while concentrating on another given that Apple clearly has the resources to do both well and concurrently. If Steve didn't feel the need to have his hands on everything, he could easily dole the computer division out to someone in the company who actually cares about it.

As for "overpriced [products] u don't need", most of Apple's current computer and gadget lineup could fit into that description so I fail to see the point, but then when you feel the need to call people idiots and muppets in a discussion you had no real point to make in the first place.

 

[SSALVAS]

opinion

I think it is not a good idea to make it thicker in order to cram such a good camera in it. Maybe a worse one. Since I upgraded to ios4, the battery's span is shorter and I think they will improve battery capacity than to waste space in a HD recorder. Apple is a patient company. They offer things when it is the right time for it. An apple product has a good battery life. Anyway I have enough with my 2nd G ipod touch