What the touch REALLY needs

Discussion in 'iPod touch' started by iMJustAGuy, May 18, 2008.

  1. iMJustAGuy macrumors 68020


    Sep 10, 2007
    Beach, FL
    when ppl do feature requests, they say all this crazy stuff, like a slide out qwerty and gps, thats stupid (i mean its IYO) but first of all get an iphone if you want gps and camera.. anyway, i really think we (touch owners) should get a speaker.. thats all im asking for...i have wanted exteranl speakers on the ipod way before iphohne and touch cam out...how likely do you think this is?
  2. EricNau Moderator emeritus


    Apr 27, 2005
    San Francisco, CA
    Pretty unlikely. The speaker in the iPhone isn't meant for music - it's meant for speakerphone, as a speaker of that size simply can't produce good music. Plus, they add more bulk (for a feature most people would never use).

    If you want to listen to music, your best bet is either headphones or external speakers.
  3. puma7 macrumors newbie

    Mar 18, 2008
    No, what it REALLY needs is volume control in the form of tactile buttons on the outside of it.
  4. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3


    Apr 6, 2007
    Portland, OR
    agreed, or at least gesture based volume, pause/play, and next/previous controls. That way you don't have to look at the screen to do everything, you can just swipe or tap or something.
  5. iMJustAGuy thread starter macrumors 68020


    Sep 10, 2007
    Beach, FL
    true that. that is why i sold mine 2 weekd ago! BUT I REALLY WANT IT BACK. Im gunna wait until an update first tho. the only thing that sucks was i sold it for 150 with the jan update and there was NOTHING wrong with it.. **STUPID ME** i miss it. im stuck with my ol samsung ypk3 so at least i get a little bit of "touching" to do.
  6. AceFernalld macrumors 68000


    Mar 3, 2008
    I definitely agree that the iPod touch needs a speaker, I'd love that soooo much. Hopefully it'll come in the 2nd or 3rd gen.
  7. 4DThinker macrumors 68020

    Mar 15, 2008
    I'm a little addicted to media players. I have a Touch, Zune 80, Samsung P2, and a Philips SA5245BT. None have internal speakers. The Zune and Touch really nag me for that reason. The Samsung and Philips both have bluetooth. Once you invest in bluetooth, the usefulness is pretty amazing. I've got bluetooth headphones, a bluetooth adapter for my ipod docks, and a bluetooth adapter for my home theater amplifier. I love the Touch. Stick Bluetooth in it and I'll sell all the others (except the Zune with 80gb storage). Check my blog for details.
  8. jimleszczynski macrumors regular


    Jan 19, 2008
    Mount Pleasant, MI
    I think a speaker would be a terrible idea.. (IMO)

    :apple: Battery Life Issues
    :apple: Bulk
    :apple: Sound Quality
    :apple: Price Increase
    :apple: Tacky
  9. Padraig macrumors 6502a

    Dec 12, 2005

    Agreed, that is why I use my nano almost constantly and leave the touch at home.
  10. Cinematographer macrumors 6502a


    Sep 12, 2005
    far away
    I completly agree with what you say. But you forgot …

    :apple: Kids on public transport listening to music without headphones on.

    I never ever missed speakers on my iPod touch, and I can't imagine using them.
  11. windowpain macrumors 6502a

    Apr 19, 2008
    I agree too. I use my nano when I'm driving (hooked to a radio transmitter in the cigarette lighter) Don't really want to be taking my eyes off the road to be tapping album covers..

    The nano is much more practical when you are on the move.
  12. jimleszczynski macrumors regular


    Jan 19, 2008
    Mount Pleasant, MI
    LOL! I had that one on the back burner, then I forgot it when I was replying to the thread. I was going to totally say that though. It would be so annoying.
  13. marold280 macrumors 6502


    Mar 16, 2008
    i would have to agree with the volume controls. and maybe bluetooth would be good for wireless syncing ? or they could use the wifi for wireless syncing. i would love that feature :)
  14. brandonzar macrumors regular

    Mar 18, 2008
    I think the speakers, bluetooth, and external volume controls are great ideas, I agree that the price increase would be a bad thing, but I'd pay a little more for the convenience. As for the speaker criticism:

    :apple:if the battery life is a problem for you don't use the speaker, my battery lasts for days
    :apple:I find that the touch is to skinny to hold comfortably without a case
    :apple:the sound quality would suck, but for alarms (the current alarm speaker is way to quiet) and you tube videos who cares?
    :apple:I'm not sure what you mean by tacky, the iPhone has a external speaker, is it "Tacky"?
    :apple:I agree that it would be annoying to have kids on public transit using it to play their music, but they are already annoying me with their cell phones and loud talking, how is keeping a speaker out of the touch solving that? Punk kids will always be annoying, buy some noise isolating headphones they work wonders.
  15. razorianfly macrumors 65816


    Oct 16, 2007
    Cheshire, United Kingdom
    The day Apple put a speaker on any iPod, will be the day I boycott the iPod line. The iPod was launched as the 'personal' music player. Very important word there, 'personal':

    1. of, pertaining to, or coming as from a particular person; individual; private: a personal opinion.

    Ok, in certain situations music is meant to be shared, and in alot of those situations this is great (Concerts, Conferences, Public Performances), but in others it's annoying, irritating and widely disliked. Because we are talking about a mass-market product, you can't stop these people from using a situation like having built in external speakers, irresponsibly - unless, the option isn't there to use, as it currently isn't (Woo Hoo!).

    Ever been on the bus and some hard-knock who seems to fancies himself has brought along his portable speakers/phone/mp4 player along for the ride?, blasting whatever junk he likes listening to down your and everyone else's ear-drums, for the entire duration? - if you haven't then you won't understand my argument. Personally, I think the iPod should remain an iPod - meaning, you play what you want, when you want to, wherever you want to, but with headphones. It's your music at the end of the day. Music preference is a matter of personal opinion, and because music has such mass variation, not every piece of music suits everybody's listening preference.

    In short, I am 100% against a speaker for the iPod touch, classic, nano and future iPod's, for the above reasons, and I think adding one to the iPhone was a huge mistake.

    What the iPod touch REALLY needs is bluetooth, but thats for another thread ...

    My .02 cents.

  16. brandonzar macrumors regular

    Mar 18, 2008
    I agree with you 100% for most of the iPod line, but the iPhone and Touch are not just iPods they have a lot more uses. Having an external speaker would enable incoming e-mail alerts, an alarm that you can hear, and the ability to enjoy music, video, or games in the privacy of your own home without having to use headphones or haul around speakers.

    People are going to be annoying no matter what features you keep off of the Touch. All the buses in my area have signs that say no music without headphones and I would assume that they do in your city too, so if this is really a problem for you either confront the individual causing the disturbance or tell the bus driver and he will. If you prefer to not to be involved in any form of confrontation then get a pair of noise isolating headphones and keep quiet, but I would be willing to bet that you aren't the only one on the bus that these jerks are annoying and if everyone just sits there annoyed and quiet then the problem is going to get worse. Stand up and fight the real problem, not against a useful feature that people can use for legitimate purposes.
  17. dmkemick macrumors member

    Apr 14, 2008
    I don't really care about the speaker, it would be a decent feature added if it didn't come at a price (battery life) but it's not something I'm hoping for. Some way to change volume or tracks without having to look at the device though, I think that's pretty key. I'd love to see that implemented somehow, but I don't expect it.
  18. ansalmo macrumors regular

    May 23, 2005
    A speaker, though only in so far as it being able to make alarm sounds that are audible in a standard office environment - it could then better replace any of my previous PDAs. Other than that, Bluetooth would be handy.
  19. madmaxmedia macrumors 68030

    Dec 17, 2003
    Los Angeles, CA
  20. LeahM macrumors 6502a


    Mar 18, 2008
    Yea, I don't think I'd like speakers, I mean I have the option of buying a $10 set which isn't much wider then the ipod itselt but I don't want to.

    I would also LOVE to have a audio control option. If not on the side of the ipod but maybe once you press the 'on' button, atleast I wouldn't have to swipe the little thing. Well at the very least anyway.

    I'd also like a larger volumn control button
  21. brandonzar macrumors regular

    Mar 18, 2008
    Can't you already do this by hitting the home button twice rapidly?
  22. LeahM macrumors 6502a


    Mar 18, 2008
    I have no idea... *checking* ... Wow, I never knew that. :eek: Thank you!
  23. davidy macrumors 6502


    Jan 28, 2008
    Already available with PocketTouch. You might find it on your list of applications in Install, or see it here http://www.appleiphoneschool.com/2008/03/22/pockettouch-11/

    Swipe up to increase volume
    Swipe down to decrease volume
    Swipe right for next track
    Swipe left for previous track
    Tap screen to pause/resume
  24. brandonzar macrumors regular

    Mar 18, 2008
    No problem, it took me a while to figure that out too, but it is very useful.

    That looks really cool but I can't find the source anywhere, I hope someone makes that for the app store when it comes online.
  25. jbarr macrumors regular

    Feb 17, 2008
    I just find it so amazing that so many of you are so adamantly against a built-in speaker on the iPT. I think you're really missing the point. The intent of adding an internal speaker is NOT to provide high quality sound. I think we can all agree that if you want to hear high quality sound from an iPT, then use earbuds, headphones, or connect it to an external speaker or amp--that seems to be a no-brainer.

    But we're not looking for high quality sound here. We just want the ability to simply hear sound without the hassle of headphones or earbuds. Just about EVERY modern (and not-so-modern) PDA has some sort of speaker that is more capable than what's currently included. Why should the iPT be different? I really think it's because of the fact that the iPT has "iPod" in its name, so therefore it MUST immediately get relegated to a "device + earbuds" status.

    Really, how many times have you wanted to simply show someone a small video clip or play a sound byte, but you decided against it because you either didn't have, or don't want to hassle with headphones or earbuds? And as applications become available, you can be sure that many will have sound that would be better played with a speaker more capable than what's currently included.

    Some of us chose the iPT over the iPhone for cost reasons. (The cost of an iPhone is over 6 times that of an iPT, when considering the required 24-month service plan) yet how much would it cost Apple and the consumer to add a simple internal speaker? And no, it wouldn't be "always on". Obviously, a System Settings would let the user configure it. Come on, let's step out of the restrictive mold of an MP3 or Media player, and have a little vision.

    Many users are seeing the iPT not as "just an iPod" but as SO MUCH more. I firmly believe that Apple has a HUGE opportunity to become the PDA/SmartPhone leader, snagging the title from Palm. With AppStore coming soon and the overall amazing design and implementation of the iPhone and iPT, it just seems that omitting something as basic as an internal speaker just because "it's an iPod" is really limiting and short-sighted.

Share This Page