Well I believe that there are higher ppi screens. The blackberry bold's screen is half the size of iPhone's screen, but the same resolution. So... that poster was right.
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.
iPod touch "new" iPod Touch? -> That´s it??
- Thread starter Francois22
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well I believe that there are higher ppi screens. The blackberry bold's screen is half the size of iPhone's screen, but the same resolution. So... that poster was right.
I don't know, but wanted to check.
If the iPhone/Touch is similar to the Newton, then the updates are minor.
well,...at least I expected 64 gb,...
bad
I wanted one,... but I don´t pay more than the classic costs for a 32 gb Pod,...
I think, I keep my cute classic
bad
I wanted one,... but I don´t pay more than the classic costs for a 32 gb Pod,...I think, I keep my cute classic
God i don't really see what some of you people were expecting, but how can this update be bad, the touch got two features that people were begging for - a speaker, and volume controls, oh and then apple dropped the prices... what were you expecting exactly?? a free ipod touch with GPS and 3G and bluetooth like some idiots were predicting was gospel truth even though it was blatent apple would never add these things to the touch...
I was only expecting a better battery! So, for me is OK.
And the speakers and the microphone opens the door to a wi-fi telephon app!!!
Aaaarrrgggh!!
Why do Apple fanboys continuously utter such nonsense!? Apparently you guys have no clue as to what GPS is, what is needed, what is not, and what turn-by-turn entails.
Wi-Fi is NOT needed for turn-by-turn directions. Do you think all the taxis, travellers, hikers and boaters have to close to a wi-fi spot to use their chart plotters (which a turn-by-turn GPS is essentially)?
im glad the ipt didnt have GPS, and i think speakers is more than it deserves.
But i would of sacrificed my $5 bet about GPS for the sake of people like the OP bitchin' on about how much it sucks - WELL GO FIND A BETTER MP3 PLAYER THEN COME BACK AND JUDGE
But i would of sacrificed my $5 bet about GPS for the sake of people like the OP bitchin' on about how much it sucks - WELL GO FIND A BETTER MP3 PLAYER THEN COME BACK AND JUDGE
Yeah, with that whole "touch 2,1" firmware observation thing we were expecting a product overhaul not.. whatever this was.
Common tablet already ffs
Common tablet already ffs
iPhone applications already know how to adjust to resolution changes - it happens every time you turn the iPhone on its side. I seem to recall the software guy talking about how the interface builder automatically handles the resolution changes by using 'stretchable' whitespace to centre buttons and such.
Except for your shouting in your post, the thing about the touch merely being an mp3 player (contrary to what most seem to think), and the part of the GPS, I have to agree with you on one point: The speaker.
I can see why people want it to play those silly games, but speakers in portable gear annoy me to no end. I can see how they _can_ be useful, but all I see are stupid looser teenagers using their tinny speakers everywhere and anywhere. Sigh. We'll now have more of those stupid feggers pestering their surroundings.
It's "Come on", not "common"*
The N810 has an 800 x 480 res on a 4" screen. And there's more - and you don't need to look at Japanese phones for references. Cost-wise, size-wise, it's not a bad compromise, but a higher-res screen would make the interface pop a little more.
To the OP I'd ask what you expected given what else is out there?
I think I'll probably skip this generation. I usually use the Touch with a remote on the go so on-unit volume control is not that big a factor and the new features are not sufficiently compelling to get me away from my $1500 (two at home, one for regular use) investment in Touches. Could something like the Nano actually use a dedicated volume control? Yes, but Apple isn't going to do it.
Is this a function of specific hardware design differences or differences in the battery? In other words, if I swap the battery out for a new one down the road (which is inevitable), can I get increased battery life like in the 2G with my 1G?
I think the update to the touch was nice. Why isn't anyone complaining about the update to the classic. It was a downgrade in capacity and it didn't get any of the features the iPod nano did, no accelerometer or genius lists, nothing. If anything this just shows that the classic is being phased out
EDIT: oops. I guess there is a genius feature for the classic, but still no accelerometer.
Putting an accelerometer (shake-to-shuffle) feature in the iPod Classic would be begging for mechanical failures in the hard disk.
As for the ability to detect orientation... Well, my guess is that the major benefit of that in the Nano comes from the fact that the screen is now in a portrait orientation by default to allow it to take up a larger percentage of the overall surface area. A portrait orientation in a media player is less versatile, because it is more-or-less opposite the aspect ratio of most videos, and the traditionally horizontal coverflow view would also be somewhat compromised. So the Nano can be rotated when appropriate to obtain a landscape screen if desired. With the ability to detect orientation, the OS can decide which presentation style is most appropriate.
The iPod Classic's screen is still in a landscape orientation by default and I'd guess that Apple's ergonomic designers probably saw little benefit in holding it sideways, so there's no need to complicate the design by incorporating the extra hardware to detect orientation.
The Classic also got support for the new-style remote control headphones, and my bet is that it also got the voice memo software (but I haven't read about that for sure).
I agree the screen is pretty lackluster on the device. No vivid colors and very low contrast.
Chalk me up for another who is happy that the new Touch isn't changed very much. I got my Touch in late July for my birthday, and if the new one had been significantly better, it would really suck.
Same here, well, bought mine in May and was hoping there was no significant improvement else i would have been a bit miffed.
Sorry, I copied and pasted that from my other post before I realized that. No need to get mad.
LOL, I'm not mad. A little impatient, perhaps, but not mad. Don't worry
why should you be mad? You're wrong after all. The touch would need to be in wifi range in order to download the maps. Otherwise you would need the maps stored locally which would take up gigabytes in storage and wouldn't work with google maps. Nor could the info be transferee through GPS as it's too slow.
Just had a funny thought. Set up a squid proxy server on the iPod and run Google maps through the cache!
(Oh my. Did I actually post on this thread?!)
-john
1) Somehow my Garmin 60Cx which came with 64MB of storage managed to provide useful base maps.
2) The nice thing is one size does not fit all. You can allocate megabytes or gigabytes to map cache.
3) Maps don't have to be very large to be useful. I could only save maps of my city for example which would be *very* useful, and not take much space.
4) We *have* gigabytes available if we so choose. It is just a question of how we want to spend it.
I'm not trying to argue that the Touch should or should not have a GPS. It's just sort of my knee-jerk response to the idea that there is only one way to skin the cat.
-john