UK Retailer Claims September iPod Touch Refresh to Bring 5-MP Camera, HD Video Recording, FaceTime, and More

[Jayomat]

If you don't want to switch to AT&T or pay an ETF, and the iPod Touch gives you literally everything the iPhone has minus the phone, then you'll buy the Touch. That's exactly what I did, until I decided that I was tired of carrying two devices.

The iPT does not give you the same features as the iPhone for the simple fact that it only has WiFi which significantly narrows it's usefull operational area. If you are not in range of a wifi network, it's nothing more than a device with the ipod app (including podcasts + books etc.) and games, as the greater percentage of usefull apps need some sort of internet connection. Sure, there are apps that don't require internet and are usefull, but my point is that the iPT does not equal or replace the functionality of an iPhone.

And if you don't need or want a permanent internet connection, I think you are not in the targeted market of iPhone buyers in the first place, and this is why you bought the iPT, because at that point when you bought it, you did not need the phone part of iPhone, which proofs my point: people who need or want a phone buy an iPhone, people who do not need phone and/or permanent internet buy an iPhone... those two scenarios do not interfere

 

[Speedy2]

Why would they need to add Facetime to the computers, they already do video chats with iChat and Skype?

For starters no one is using iChat, and the fact that people are using Skype is not exactly for Apple's benefit, right?

Facetime makes little sense the way it is now, with extremely limited number of users. It needs to be extended to other devices and platforms to be a killer feature.

Also, it makes zero sense for Apple to keep iChat as a second technology for the very same purpose.

 

[rwilliams]

How many people would pay a 2-year contract to get just a few more features?

I'm sure there are many, many people who started out with iPod Touches and moved up to the iPhone. I know of about a dozen myself. It's the gateway drug.

 

[iMacmatician]

I'm sure there are many, many people who started out with iPod Touches and moved up to the iPhone.

For the phone capability?

 

[siddavis]

Most people in your position would buy an iPhone instead

No they wouldn't. I'm one of those people that really want the rear facing camera from the iP4 to come to the iPod Touch. I carry a company paid cell phone, and my current Touch wherever I go. The camera on my crappy phone is well, crappy. This would be huge to be able to capture stills and short videos of my little guy learning all sorts of new things. However, I'm not about to start paying $65/month minimum for that benefit...

 

[CFreymarc]

This is interesting. I always thought that Apple intentionally withheld features from the iPod Touch in order to try to persuade people to go with the iPhone. Putting a 5 MP camera w/flash, front camera, Facetime, and improved display on the Touch seems great for consumers, but also removes a lot of the incentive for people to buy iPhones, thus depriving Apple of 2 years of monthly revenue from customers.

Not really. There is a huge market out there for devices that have no monthly bill connected to it that is not at all in competition with smart-phones.

Other mobile systems houses really shot themselves in the foot going "smartphone only" and discontinued their PDA device line. Some say the wireless carriers leaned on them to get rid of their PDA line. Others claim it was done to increase the earnings and thus the stock price. I think it was a lack of resources and very poor engineering management.

Many who go the iPod Touch route already have a cell phone and tether it to their iPod Touch. IMO, this is just an evolution of the iPod Touch line by adding more features.

So what it the name going to be? "iPod Touch 4" or something else?

 

[rwilliams]

For the phone capability?

Plus the camera & 3G. If I could have gotten an iPod Touch with a full camera and 3G data plan (as some are wishing for), I never would have bought an iPhone. I'd just use Skype or Vonage Mobile for making calls.

Just to clarify for all the fellas, I'm not wishing that the Touch doesn't get these new features. I just don't see Apple doing it. If I'm wrong, then that's fantastic for the consumers.

 

[Bytor65]

Common sense says that if you're earning money every month from iPhone customers, you give it premium features that will entice people to sign a 2-year contract with AT&T. If you make the iPod Touch identical to the iPhone, then the incentive for people to leave their current phone carrier and sign a contract with AT&T is out the window. They can stay where they are, buy an iPod Touch, and have all the same features, all without paying anything to Apple outside of the initial purchase. That's why it makes no business sense to make them identical. You're running a huge risk of killing your own profits. The smartest thing that Apple can do is to give the new Touch a couple of features that the iPhone 4 has (new design, front and rear cameras, faster processor) without giving it all of the iPhone 4's features. That way you still upgrade the Touch, but still leave enough premium features exclusive to the iPhone to try to lure people into signing that contract.

That doesn't make any more sense. You don't get all the features with a Touch. It isn't a phone. They don't compete with each other. The touch will not cannibalize iPhone sales.

You will have minimal success trying to sell a PMP to someone that actually wants a Phone.

This is the kind of armchair business arguments you get when people don't think it through.

Limiting the touch will not sell more IP4s, it will sell less IPTs. As competitors that aren't laboring under such illusions will not limit their PMPs.

Even when cannibalization arguments have some merit (which they don't here) you are better off cannibalizing your own sales than having a competitor do it for you.

 

[batchtaster]

How many people would pay a 2-year contract to get just a few more features?

The same number of people who currently own an iPhone and therefore have already chosen the iPhone features over the iPod touch features.

 

[Stiss]

LOL! I work for John Lewis!

 

[blackpond]

As a current iPhone 3G user I'm looking forward to the end of my contract. After two years with the iPhone I've found that I use it as an iPod Touch much more often than as a phone. That said, it would be insanely great if Apple makes an iPod Touch that is everything the iPhone 4 is less the phone. It would be my next iDevice - contract free. I'll take whatever free phone the cheapest cell company has to offer for a cell phone.

Concerning FaceTime adoption. I think we'll most certainly see iChat become FaceTime compliant and very possibly the touch. But also, Apple is making it an open standard which means any third party software developer can make a FaceTime client. So if Apple doesn't do it, someone else will. I'm fairly certain we will see FaceTime on Mac, FaceTime on Windows, and dare I say it, FaceTime on Android. The best part is, there will be competing developers with multiple FaceTime clients for any one device- bringing us options.

 

[HLdan]

So what it the name going to be? "iPod Touch 4" or something else?

I dunno, but I wish Apple would rename the iPod Touch, I'm sick of people calling it an "iTouch".

 

[Bytor65]

The same number of people who currently own an iPhone and therefore already have.

That makes no sense. We are talking about the potential lost iPhone sales that a fully featured touch would cause (nill).

If you already own an iPhone and are looking for an upgrade. You are not going to choose an IPT4 over a IP4. That is simply senseless.

No one who wants a phone, is going to buy a Touch becuase it has the other features of the iPhone, but isn't a phone. If they want a phone, they going to get the iPhone.

 

[blackpond]

That makes no sense. We are talking about the potential lost iPhone sales that a fully featured touch would cause (nill).

If you already own an iPhone and are looking for an upgrade. You are not going to choose an IPT4 over a IP4. That is simply senseless.

No one who wants a phone, is going to buy a Touch becuase it has the other features of the iPhone, but isn't a phone. If they want a phone, they going to get the iPhone.

Put me in the senseless camp then because I would and hope to be able to do exactly this. And I do want a phone, by the way. I also want a new toaster but I don't need it integrated with an iPod Touch.

 

[rwilliams]

That doesn't make any more sense. You don't get all the features with a Touch. It isn't a phone. They don't compete with each other. The touch will not cannibalize iPhone sales.

You will have minimal success trying to sell a PMP to someone that actually wants a Phone.

This is the kind of armchair business arguments you get when people don't think it through.

Limiting the touch will not sell more IP4s, it will sell less IPTs. As competitors that aren't laboring under such illusions will not limit their PMPs.

Even when cannibalization arguments have some merit (which they don't here) you are better off cannibalizing your own sales than having a competitor do it for you.

They've always gimped the iPod Touch when compared to the iPhone. Always. But I guess this is just an armchair business argument with no thought. Limiting the Touch so far hasn't appeared to hurt sales of it at all. So apparently, through the first 3 generations of both products, Apple has been closer to my take on this more than they have with yours, or they would have made them identical (minus the phone) by now. That's not to say that you don't make valid points about the products, because you most certainly do. Thus far, Apple just hasn't agreed.

But I have no desire to argue with you about this. If they give the Touch all the features, outstanding. If they don't, then it'll be business as usual for the 4th consecutive year.

 

[Shanpdx]

iPod touch with Phone

data disabled? is it possible?

i know iOS4 now have a option of disabling cellular data

 

[wikoogle]

They already released the new iPod, its the iPhone 4 with no reception

I'm pretty sure that's just the iPhone 4. Atleast if you live in New York.

 

[iMacmatician]

The same number of people who currently own an iPhone and therefore have already chosen the iPhone features over the iPod touch features.

By that I mean other than the phone features.

How many people will pay a contract fee for a camera.

 

[WeegieMac]

While I expected FaceTime to come to the iPod touch, it just doesn't stand out as an iPod feature.

Adding the same 5mp/720p video camera system is also strange, because they could end up cannibalising the iPhone sales if they're not careful.

The iPod touch was always loosely labelled "the iPhone without the phone" even though it lacked more features from the iPhone than just the ability to make calls and send texts.

Making the iPod touch a proper iPhone 4 without the cellular features could be a huge error. People need "iPhone only" features to make them sign up to a contract or shell out heavily on SIM free.

 

[siddavis]

They've always gimped the iPod Touch when compared to the iPhone. Always. But I guess this is just an armchair business argument with no thought. Limiting the Touch so far hasn't appeared to hurt sales of it at all. So apparently, through the first 3 generations of both products, Apple has been closer to my take on this more than they have with yours, or they would have made them identical (minus the phone) by now. That's not to say that you don't make valid points about the products, because you most certainly do. Thus far, Apple just hasn't agreed.

But I have no desire to argue with you about this. If they give the Touch all the features, outstanding. If they don't, then it'll be business as usual for the 4th consecutive year.

But your argument is that they "gimp" it for the sole purpose of driving those other sales to the phone. Could it be that they have to gimp it due to cost so they can come in at a pricing sweet spot? At some point they have to draw those lines otherwise we all b-tch about the high prices (which we do anyway!), plus lose out on sales to people who would otherwise purchase if it was simply cheaper.

 

[Alvi]

I'm sold if it has all that, if it has GPS instead of that Wifi tracking that doesn't work well somewhere else than in the US, i have a 3GS and i wouldn't need a new phone for at least 2 other years with that awesome ipod with a way better battery life

 

[JonB3Z]

I don't really see how one would chose an iPodTouch over an iPhone if he wants a phone as well.... !?!?

Because not everyone wants to pay for a data plan. One of the markets for the iPod Touch is made up of those whose parents are paying the phone bill. The cost of the data plan is a hard sell to a lot of parents. (Easier now that it bottoms out at $15, but still....) So the kid has a non-smart flip phone with just a voice plan, plus a Touch for music and gaming.

Also, not everyone wants an iPhone for their phone. My son, for example, needs a physical keyboard for texting (~3000 texts/month). Yet he's saving up for a Touch because he wants the gaming that goes along with it. (I'm suggesting he wait until September to buy.)

 

[iMacmatician]

But your argument is that they "gimp" it for the sole purpose of driving those other sales to the phone. Could it be that they have to gimp it due to cost so they can come in at a pricing sweet spot? At some point they have to draw those lines otherwise we all b-tch about the high prices (which we do anyway!), plus lose out on sales to people who would otherwise purchase if it was simply cheaper.

They might also need to save money on iPod touch components to accommodate the larger flash memory capacities compared to iPhones.

If there's cannibalization between the iPod touch and the iPhone, then it's not due to flash memory.

 

[adztaylor]

I really hope they put FaceTime capability in Macs, iPads, and iPod Touches. It would take video calling to a whole new level.

 

[fabian9]

Supporting the idea of a FaceTime-enabled iPod touch is a slide presented by Steve Jobs at Apple's introduction of the iPhone 4 indicating that the company expects to ship tens of millions of "FaceTime devices" this year. As noted by Daring Fireball's John Gruber, Apple's decision to use the term "FaceTime devices" rather than simply addressing the iPhone 4 suggests that the company has more in store for the feature, with the iPod touch being an obvious possibility.

John Gruber? You heard it here first!
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/931026/