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.
More Claims of Smaller, Square iPod Nano Next Week, Along With Possible 3G iPod Touch and iLife
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Harder better faster stronger!.
By harder I mean easier
And what do you mean by easier?
correct me if I'm wrong because I'm not 100% geek yet. But I think it means it decodes And processes info faster. See here:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit?wasRedirected=true
What we REALLY need.
The major problem with multi touch is that you have to be looking at the device to use it. With the old 2nd gen shuffles, you could use them when they were clipped onto your pockets or something because they had physical buttons. But the physical buttons took up too much room, so they couldn't fit a screen. But does anybody remember the Terminator from T2? Liquid metal! What we really need is a shuffle/nano made out of the same metal as the second Terminator. You can use it as a touch screen, but then you lock it and BAM! You have physical buttons! Plus, you can download self defense apps, so your shuffle morphs into a knife! Win, win, WIN! Dear Apple, please buy Cyberdyne systems.
The major problem with multi touch is that you have to be looking at the device to use it. With the old 2nd gen shuffles, you could use them when they were clipped onto your pockets or something because they had physical buttons. But the physical buttons took up too much room, so they couldn't fit a screen. But does anybody remember the Terminator from T2? Liquid metal! What we really need is a shuffle/nano made out of the same metal as the second Terminator. You can use it as a touch screen, but then you lock it and BAM! You have physical buttons! Plus, you can download self defense apps, so your shuffle morphs into a knife! Win, win, WIN! Dear Apple, please buy Cyberdyne systems.
Easier to lose and easier to steal.
Liquidmetal?
The major problem with multi touch is that you have to be looking at the device to use it. With the old 2nd gen shuffles, you could use them when they were clipped onto your pockets or something because they had physical buttons. But the physical buttons took up too much room, so they couldn't fit a screen. But does anybody remember the Terminator from T2? Liquid metal! What we really need is a shuffle/nano made out of the same metal as the second Terminator. You can use it as a touch screen, but then you lock it and BAM! You have physical buttons! Plus, you can download self defense apps, so your shuffle morphs into a knife! Win, win, WIN! Dear Apple, please buy Cyberdyne systems.
Liquidmetal?
Played with another nano mockup with the virtual click wheel.
Maybe it'll have just a big screen if it was touchscreen, and not two seperate screens.
Harder better faster stronger!
By harder I mean easier
64 bit applications can move data around faster than 32 bit applications. For something like music or video, it is not that important. The slightly more exiting part of a 64 bit iTunes, is that OS-X would be one step closer to dropping all of it's 32 bit code.
From the user perspective, you will not see that big of a difference.
Edited to say, I remember my Grandfather telling me that in old money a bit was 12.5 cents. A 64 bit OS should be worth $4 more (people under the age of 120 may not get this joke).
Liquidmetal (Which Apple recently acquired
) is metal that can be bent into any shape or form. Basically shiny, hard play-doh. :3
Liquidmetal (Which Apple recently acquired
Kind of correct. Liquidmetal is more or less amorphic with almost no crystalline structure. Because crystals in the metal are fault points, they tend to be where metal fails. get rid of the crystal and you can make metal much stronger.
I agree with your viewpoint. For the average consumer, the one that owns a point and shoot w/video recording, iLife fits their needs. But beyond that, for prosumers and those that take photography/filmmaking more seriously, iLife isn't even bare minimum. It's sucks because I really do want to use iPhoto and iMovie, but that means me exporting the pictures from Aperture over to iPhoto, and for what? Just so that I can have my photos in a nice application, when Aperture is already fine as is.
But not only that, iLife as a whole is slow as molasses.
the key is making calls - even then you can't call any number for free; for example Skype to Skype is free but if you wan to call a non-Skype number you need to buy minutes or a plan. Sure, it can be cheaper but you have to weigh convenience vs cost. Do you want to be tied to a headset? If your device is a phone first, a 3G touch would not be a very viable replacement.
I see this as a way to add to Apple's market - those people who text much more than talk on the phone and want an iPod. This gets them into an iPod as a convergence device; to the point they can dump their phone and go with this, especially if most of the people already they call already have a Skype capable phone.
It can access more memory. Other than that you probably wont see much difference for now. With newer versions it will continue to make use of more memory so it is set up for the future.
Same people who are bashing the idea of 3G on a touch are the same whop bashed an idea of an"iphone with out the phone" and are also the same who went out and bought the "iphone with out the phone" .
I think a 3G Touch is inevitable, it's just a question of when.
The 3G iPad was a huge success. And if they come out with a smaller (7"?) iPad it will also offer 3G and likely be just as successful (at least relative to the wifi only version).
I would argue that the more portable a device, the more 3G becomes of value. Something that fits in your pocket like the Touch gets taken everywhere, and so having 3G data is incredibly useful. I live in a major city with 10+ wifi networks where ever I go, but they're all locked. Finding public wifi is usually a pain. Even cafes that offer free wifi often require a password.
So the idea that Apple would have 3G data for all there iPad like devices except the one you take everywhere doesn't make any sense. They'll figure out a way to make it work financially. Perhaps they'll get a new exclusive 3G Touch data partner that will give them a monthly data cut in exchange for the exclusive rights. Or maybe it's just a matter of finding the right price-point ($4XX 3G Touch with enough stuff missing that it's just as profitable as the iPhone); for all we know the monthly revenue share with AT&T service plans is ending with the AT&T exclusivity agreement.
The 3G iPad was a huge success. And if they come out with a smaller (7"?) iPad it will also offer 3G and likely be just as successful (at least relative to the wifi only version).
I would argue that the more portable a device, the more 3G becomes of value. Something that fits in your pocket like the Touch gets taken everywhere, and so having 3G data is incredibly useful. I live in a major city with 10+ wifi networks where ever I go, but they're all locked. Finding public wifi is usually a pain. Even cafes that offer free wifi often require a password.
So the idea that Apple would have 3G data for all there iPad like devices except the one you take everywhere doesn't make any sense. They'll figure out a way to make it work financially. Perhaps they'll get a new exclusive 3G Touch data partner that will give them a monthly data cut in exchange for the exclusive rights. Or maybe it's just a matter of finding the right price-point ($4XX 3G Touch with enough stuff missing that it's just as profitable as the iPhone); for all we know the monthly revenue share with AT&T service plans is ending with the AT&T exclusivity agreement.
It went even further then that. iLounge noted after disassembling the iPod touch that it had a place for a camera in the back. Rumor is they had some technological problems at the last minute, or they were just saving it for this iteration.
As for a 3G iPod touch... right now with the talk feature Google added within G-Mail you can make free phone calls pretty much anywhere within Canada/USA. I had a 20 minute crystal clear conversation with a family member over it on their home phone. If the touch had 3G, paying Google 10 cents a minute might be worth making important calls for someone who wants a phone feature on their iPod. I'd go for that if Apple added it. Then again, apps like that are why I think they won't.
I'm not one of them. I'm one of the guys you have been arguing with ever since this rumor came up.
If Verizon had this iphone, you could count me in for what you said.
I'm one of those people (many, many people) who has a nice non-data plan phone and doesn't want an iPod touch that will cost a lot with monthly payments on top of it. That's a disgrace.
It will be an option to those who want it. There will always be a cheap wifi only version of the touch. How is it a disgrace to give consumers more choices?
Even if you choose to buy the 3G version of the iPad, nobody will force you to pay anything monthly. It's entirely up to you.
I would be very surprised to see a 3G enabled iPod touch.
Adding Facetime and a photo/possibly video camera will already blur the line between the iPhone 4 and the iPod touch as things stand, but adding 3G will make it borderline indistinguishable aside from phonecalls and aesthetics.
People need a reason, other than phonecalls, to choose the iPhone over the iPod touch. A cheaper device that does all the new features the iPhone 4 does will simply make people choose the cheaper iPod touch and carry a basic phone for calls.
Adding Facetime and a photo/possibly video camera will already blur the line between the iPhone 4 and the iPod touch as things stand, but adding 3G will make it borderline indistinguishable aside from phonecalls and aesthetics.
People need a reason, other than phonecalls, to choose the iPhone over the iPod touch. A cheaper device that does all the new features the iPhone 4 does will simply make people choose the cheaper iPod touch and carry a basic phone for calls.
Thats what I think. Jobs knew the iPhone 4 will have video chat, and possibility the new cameras so he just decided to maker this years touch the major one. (Remember he was sick last year too, so thats why last years ipod line up wasn't that exciting)
Well, one big reason is having a single well-integrated device. Who wants to have to carry around two devices? The target market for the iPhone certainly doesn't.
Also, most cheap cell phones are $30-$40 a month, so you'd hardly be saving much by going with the $xx/month 3G Touch + $35/month basic cell phone.
Wow! $35 is not a cheap cell phone plan in my book - - that's a premium iPhone voice plan without data.
For those who really have minimal cell phone needs, a pay-as-you-go plan costs $7-$10 month - - so a low cost 3G data plan on an iPod Touch might be just the ticket!
I feel the same way, and something tells me that neither of us is the target demographic for the iPhone.
I currently have a pay as you go plan ($10/month) and would never consider buying an iPhone. But I would gladly pay $30/month for a Touch with unlimited 3G.