Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
lol

Unfortunately, iPod touch is not going to get cell phone functions. You know what an iPod touch with cell phone capability is called? iPhone.

Location feature on iPhone currently requires download of maps via data connection. iPhone always have internet connection due to cell phone service. Since iPod touch does not have constant internet connection, when not in wifi range, then the map will be blank...
 
The iPod touch uses triangulation as an alternative to GPS.

Apple didn't add data access then, what makes you think they are going to add it now? Besides, Apple doesn't even include 2.0 with the device.

The current Touch triangulation system doesn't work that well, I've tried it in downtown Sydney and it sucks. They would add data access now for all the reasons in my original post. And my Touch is running 2.0 as we speak, downloaded (for a small fee) via iTunes.

To the people who want 3g... um, wtc?

THe whole reason I got an iPod touch instead of an iPhone was because I wanted to avoid the freakish price of data plans on at&t, having 3g on the iPod touch would just be a silly idea.

Like everyone else is mentioning, wiimax seems like an ok concept for a touch.

WiMax, 3G, whatever system you prefer. It all does the same thing for the purposes of this idea. Remember that the freakish data plans on AT&T are only in the US and only because they have a monopoly on the iPhone. I suggest a Touch with 3G would be sold upfront, with a 3G capability for you to pursue if you want. ie: You can go get a data plan (or prepaid) if you want, or you can use without data access, as you like.

Certainly it wouldn't be something Apple would bring out today because it would hurt profitable iPhone sales but a bit further along the curve, as sales start to naturally slow...

The good thing about the Touch is no monthly plan.

Quite. See above.

Ok while Apple does take the world market into consideration, they also realize they're an American company, these data plans without voice that the OP keeps talking about run about $50 a month from AT&T in America, for that much might as well get an iPhone since it is subsidized, yes you could add the 3G stack in and leave it unactivated unless you sign up for the contract, but why waste the space and also then the Touch would cost more over a 2 year period than even the iPhone, with the same amount of money going to Apple since they do not receive profit sharing anymore from AT&T

1. iPhone and related products are global sellers now and forevermore. Apple don't design just for the US.

2. You're assuming that because data plans on the iPhone cost $X and are only available from AT&T that this must be the way things will always be. Plans, markets, prices, carriers, all change. In a lot of markets outside of the US, the iPhone is available from a number of different carriers with widely varying prices. Choice is a good thing, to quote someone or other.

Then why not just get an iPhone with PAYG SIM?

Cause I don't want a phone in my iPhone. See my original post for reasons.

I as a consumer can walk down to my local Rogers store and purchase a SIM-only wireless data plan with no voice service. They'll make me sign up for a month-to-month data plan, and I'll walk out of the store with a SIM card.

I can then insert it in any compatible equipment, and presto! That equipment will have data.

This is not a hypothetical description of something that might happen in the future. This is possible NOW.

A manufacturer such as Apple doesn't *need* to partner up with a specific service provider for something like this. They can sell something that is capable of optionally using 3G for data, but the customer has to separately sign up for service with whatever ISP they choose who is willing to take them on as a customer.

That sort of thing has been going on for decades with equipment going as far back as telephone modems. The principle doesn't have to fundamentally change as the physical medium changes to DSL, cable modems, WiFi, or 3G.

Thanks goosnarrggh, it's nice to have someone at least realise that '3G' doesn't mean phone calls!

The Amazon Kindle comes with a wireless cell based data connection, and no monthly fees. They offset the connection costs with the ebook profits. Given Apple makes money off of music and apps, it could also copy Amazon's strategy so that anyone buying a Touch would have a data connection with no monthly fee, offset by itunes and apps profits. The last thing to add is GPS for the location based apps.

Will it happen? More likely Jobs would try and get a monthly fee from Touch owners, which would never sell.

Interesting idea Thinker. I think the monthly fee is more likely too, but more with a 3G touch being sold upfront and you going off and getting your own 3G access however suits you best.

I don't see Apple allowing that degree of feature crossover with their flagship iPhone product...I do understand what you are arguing for, but IF it were to ever happen it would be years down the road when all products (not just Apple ones) had some degree of cellular connectivity. As of now it's a "premium" option that you get by working with a smartphone. So while it's technically possible, from a business perspective Apple doesn't have any incentive and AT&T/Voda/et al don't either, since the iPhone sells pretty well.

Certainly Apple will milk the iPhone for all it's worth. Who wouldn't? But they are also well aware that if they refuse to offer cheaper devices that fill other segments for too long, someone else will do it for them. I remember when the first iPod Mini came out in 2004 and a lot of people criticized Apple for undercutting their profitable Classic model. They did that for the same reason. And it worked kind of well for them.

So the hypothesis is that the in next generation iPod Touch there will be 3G + GPS chipsets. In other words:

iPod Touch G2 = iPhone 3G
+ Storage
- (Microphone + Speaker + Vibra + VolumeKeys + Camera)

I do not believe this.

Firstly, IMHO the differentiators between iPhone and iPod Touch are price, storage & connectivity. There is no logic to build a platform that is voice-capable (expensive chipsets) but is missing audio circuitry (cheap mic & speaker).

Don't think of the iPod Touch as a cut-down version of the flagship product, think of the Touch and the iPhone as two different versions of the same device, for different customer types. iPhone is being pushed first as it currently has the best sales potential. Touch 3G will be offered a little later to round out the offering, get wider mobile computing market share and dominate the space. Like iPod Nano and Shuffle are and were to the iPod Classic.

Also remember, the manufacturing cost the iPhone is only $173 according to iSuppli. Apple have a lot of margin to play with as the products mature and prices need to come down to maintain sales momentum.
 
The current Touch triangulation system doesn't work that well, I've tried it in downtown Sydney and it sucks. They would add data access now for all the reasons in my original post. And my Touch is running 2.0 as we speak, downloaded (for a small fee) via iTunes.

It works perfectly fine for me, in San Francisco. Also, I think you misunderstood what I said about 2.0.

Besides, Apple doesn't even include 2.0 with the device.

Of course you can buy 2.0. What I said, is that Apple does not include 2.0 with new iPod touches, meaning that 2.0 is a separate purchase. The App Store is not a feature, it is an optional upgrade. I will repeat what I said before: if you look on the online Apple Store, and click on the iPod touch, you will see this text:

"Download exciting games and other applications that leverage the technology in iPod touch, such as the Multi-Touch interface, accelerometer, and real-time 3D graphics. (Software upgrade required; sold separately.)"
 
ok so thers a sim inside that dongle yay. thats kinda cool so that means that it COULD be put in a phone. (who would though?)
Somebody who needs to fetch some email while they're on the road?

ok so if your crazy enough to tell me that you could plug a bunch of computers into a LAN running over 3G (which is pretty much a massive WAN) then im allowed to say that your better off getting dial-up and overclocking the modem, it would be cheaper and more reliable! sure you might have to leave a download going overnight but at least you could get an unlimited plan for what...$10 per month?? you could even go satellite! they are expensive but you would never have to worry about going out of range (we've all heard of the iphones crappy service lately).

i bet you that if you go over that 1gb limit then your paying a good $3-$4 per mb. go 10mb over your limit and thats an easy $30 extra to your ISP.. if your going to be running computers over 3G it isnt even worth it. 1gb allowance per month = 30mb per day, which is me pretty much browsing through MR alone. no myspace/facebook/hotmail/msn/university research.. nothing. my house averages 300-500mb usage per day and im sure that a whole bunch of other users would aswell.
Completely missing the point. Somebody was saying that the carriers would never be willing to offer service that could be compatible with a product like this. I responded by pointing out that the carriers already do offer services that would be compatible with a product like this.

yes ok it might be a good idea for old people who are on a trip around the country and need to check their emails every week. or for a business man who only wants to look at his/her emails not actually download them (to not go over the limit). for average people (and the majority of people) its a big no-go. it just doesnt seem feasible to me..
That's the question that needs to be answered - is there an adequate market of people who would be interested in a product like this to make it profitable for a manufacturer to offer it. I suspect you're right and the answer is "no".
 
1. Somebody who needs to fetch some email while they're on the road?


2. Completely missing the point. Somebody was saying that the carriers would never be willing to offer service that could be compatible with a product like this. I responded by pointing out that the carriers already do offer services that would be compatible with a product like this.


3. That's the question that needs to be answered - is there an adequate market of people who would be interested in a product like this to make it profitable for a manufacturer to offer it. I suspect you're right and the answer is "no".

(how do you quote like you did?)

1. yea ok fair enough, although the iphone let alone the touch is a feasible product for this basically because of its un-business like target market.

2. somebody was saying that and i was saying that its completely not feasible to implement such a product with the current technologies and pricing. yes there are people with money to burn, but there are more that wouldn't be willing to spend it on this kind of thing.

3. yea im kinda leaning towards the 'no' answer at this point in time. give it a while and wait until prices are cheaper and technologies are faster and more reliable.
 
Marlor said:
I doubt anyone would buy an 8GB "3G" iPod Touch for AU$700.
Those who don't need phone capability but want 3G, and don't want to pay $2000?

If you're paying $2000 for an 8GB iPhone 3G, you are getting totally shafted.

You can buy them without a monthly contract for AU$729 here (but you do have to pay an AU$80 network unlock fee if you want to switch carriers within the first six months).

If someone wants an iPod Touch 3G, then I don't see why they wouldn't just buy an iPhone 3G outright. A 3G iPod Touch would still have to be priced close to AU$700, because it would share 90% of its components with the iPhone 3G (the only things missing would be the microphone, speaker and 2MP camera, which are all relatively low-cost components).
 
If you're paying $2000 for an 8GB iPhone 3G, you are getting totally shafted.

You can buy them without a monthly contract for AU$729 here (but you do have to pay an AU$80 network unlock fee if you want to switch carriers within the first six months).

If someone wants an iPod Touch 3G, then I don't see why they wouldn't just buy an iPhone 3G outright. A 3G iPod Touch would still have to be priced close to AU$700, because it would share 90% of its components with the iPhone 3G (the only things missing would be the microphone, speaker and 2MP camera, which are all relatively low-cost components).

hhmmmm,

not sure where your sources are from but i looked on ebay and the minimum price i could see was at least $1100. bidding prices were lower obviously but they go high. where can you get that from??
 
not sure where your sources are from but i looked on ebay and the minimum price i could see was at least $1100. bidding prices were lower obviously but they go high. where can you get that from??

Those are the official prices from Optus.

For a pre-paid iPhone, it's AU$729 for the 8GB and AU$849 for the 16GB. You can go to any Optus store and get an iPhone 3G for that price (if they have them in stock).

Then, if you want to remove the network lock, you can either pay them an $80 fee, or just buy $80 of pre-paid credit, use it up, then they will remove the network lock for free.

http://www.iphoneinaustralia.com/carrier-news/official-optus-iphone-3g-pricing-3.html
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2008/07/lets_take_a_closer_look_at_optus_iphone_pricing_prepaid.html

EDIT:
Here's the page detailing the iPhone pre-paid at Optus's website:
http://personal.optus.com.au/web/oc...mobile/prepaidmobileappleiphone&site=personal
 
the iPod touch already has both, its called the iPhone:rolleyes:

ITS AN iPod!!! NOT A MAGICAL KEY TO THE PROMISED LAND.

You have wi-fi be grateful, if you want more get the iPhone, and if you don't want to be locked into a contract why are you asking this question?
 
People don't understand. The iPod Touch is really intended as the gateway product to the iPhone. Think about it.

there ya go, the sleeper post of the thread. i've been telling this to everyone. the iPod Touch is just something for people(like me) that can't afford to break contracts and sign up for new ones. so we get them and then start seeing how cool it would be to actually have the full fledged iPhone.

although, i own neither.
 
Do you honestly expect apple to include features like 3g in the iPod touch? they have the iPhone for that, and please don't say 'geez why cant you grasp that 3g is not exclusive to phones' yes i get that but you're honestly thinking it would be put into an iPod? no chance!
 
Last edited:
I love these speculative threads. It's amazing how absolutely positive some are about what will happen, and how absolutely positive some are about what won't. Then there are the chances... "no chance", "small chance", "good chance", etc..

I'm fairly positive (any Apple employees in here?) none of us know for sure. As such, I'll wait for September to see what Apple announces.

See you all then!
4D
 
Ogo to go go?

Ironically, as much as you are all saying that it would never sell and AT&T would never allow it, it once did, and many Americans such as myself would be glad to see it return.

Then it was called the Ogo. You can still buy one from ogo.com, but only if you live in one of those available countries. (You don't, trust me) When Cingular became AT&T, the Ogo was discontinued, because it didn't get enough attention and thus sold poorly.

Would I like an iOgo? Duh. I'd buy a new portable internet device in a second, but not for the expense of an iPhone. My family refuses to switch to AT&T for their voice plan.

Would SJ ever put 3G into an iPod Touch? I doubt it highly. The Ogo failed in the States, and SJ would have to persuade a carrier to try it again.
 
there ya go, the sleeper post of the thread. i've been telling this to everyone. the iPod Touch is just something for people(like me) that can't afford to break contracts and sign up for new ones. so we get them and then start seeing how cool it would be to actually have the full fledged iPhone.

although, i own neither.

Whoa, who wants to break contracts? I'm on Verizon right now, just picked up a new phone and took my minutes down. I pay $34.99, after taxes it's about $40. I can't afford the lowballed price of $80/month for the iPhone, regardless of features or other sellings points. I can do $40. I cannot do $80.

It's not so much a "stop-gap" product for me until I get an iPhone, it's the closest I'll ever get frankly. I don't want to pay for another subscription for "data". I already pay $50/month for Comcast at home, nobody including me has anything that's so important that they can't wait until they get home.
 
Location feature on iPhone currently requires download of maps via data connection. iPhone always have internet connection due to cell phone service. Since iPod touch does not have constant internet connection, when not in wifi range, then the map will be blank...

Maps aren't that big. On a 32GB or 64GB iPod Touch, a complete US map would not be that big of a deal. If Garmin, or TomTom get the go ahead to release their software on the app store, a GPS enabled iPod Touch would be a perfectly decent portable GPS unit. The iPhone could extend on the what the Touch offers by throwing in AGPS, and real time traffic/nearby sales style subscription services, of course.

Any serious GPS solution is going to need to store maps locally anyway. Even on Wireless through generally decent DSL, Google Maps is hardly an enjoyable realtime experience.
 
Whoa, who wants to break contracts? I'm on Verizon right now, just picked up a new phone and took my minutes down. I pay $34.99, after taxes it's about $40. I can't afford the lowballed price of $80/month for the iPhone, regardless of features or other sellings points. I can do $40. I cannot do $80.

It's not so much a "stop-gap" product for me until I get an iPhone, it's the closest I'll ever get frankly. I don't want to pay for another subscription for "data". I already pay $50/month for Comcast at home, nobody including me has anything that's so important that they can't wait until they get home.

Aye. I use my cellphone for emergencies, and that's it. If I have something to say to someone, I'd rather talk to them in person. My iPod Touch is the PDA I always wanted. An actual audible speaker would be nice, but beyond that, it does everything I need. I have no desire to make phone calls with it, and no desire to shell out $80 for the luxury of being screwed by AT&T. If I were jabbering on the thing for upwards of three hours a day, I'd feel differently, but the 20 or so minutes a week of call time I rack up, in no way justifies a monthly cell plan.
 
Aye. I use my cellphone for emergencies, and that's it. If I have something to say to someone, I'd rather talk to them in person. My iPod Touch is the PDA I always wanted. An actual audible speaker would be nice, but beyond that, it does everything I need. I have no desire to make phone calls with it, and no desire to shell out $80 for the luxury of being screwed by AT&T. If I were jabbering on the thing for upwards of three hours a day, I'd feel differently, but the 20 or so minutes a week of call time I rack up, in no way justifies a monthly cell plan.

Ditto (and very well stated, I might add).
 
Front page rumours about GPS in the new iPod Touch....

If the new Touch has GPS that only makes it more likely to be 3G data capable. All the new location based apps we've seen the last month require data on the go.

I still stand by my original post.
 
Front page rumours about GPS in the new iPod Touch....

If the new Touch has GPS that only makes it more likely to be 3G data capable. All the new location based apps we've seen the last month require data on the go.

I still stand by my original post.

picked GPS, it would be a nice touch. however, 3G data access is a big no no for me. seriously... nuhh. GPS doesnt need 3G and vice versa so i see no need for 3G.
 
picked GPS, it would be a nice touch. however, 3G data access is a big no no for me. seriously... nuhh. GPS doesnt need 3G and vice versa so i see no need for 3G.

It's true that GPS doesn't need 3G to let the unit locate itself but practically, in the implementation of GPS technology in the iPhone (and therefore likely in the future iPod Touch) it does. Maps are all served from the cloud in real-time and A-GPS is used over vanilla GPS for speed and battery life reasons.

I know maps could be stored locally but so far there's been no real sign of it, and A-GPS was chosen in the iPhone because it's so much quicker on initial locate than vanilla GPS. Would we go bananas for an iPod Touch whose GPS took 3 minutes to find itself?

GPS in the next iPod Touch likely means A-GPS, which likely means 3G data capability. It's a logical chain.

But hey, I'll be proved right or wrong in a few weeks!
 
It's true that GPS doesn't need 3G to let the unit locate itself but practically, in the implementation of GPS technology in the iPhone (and therefore likely in the future iPod Touch) it does. Maps are all served from the cloud in real-time and A-GPS is used over vanilla GPS for speed and battery life reasons.

I know maps could be stored locally but so far there's been no real sign of it, and A-GPS was chosen in the iPhone because it's so much quicker on initial locate than vanilla GPS. Would we go bananas for an iPod Touch whose GPS took 3 minutes to find itself?

GPS in the next iPod Touch likely means A-GPS, which likely means 3G data capability. It's a logical chain.

But hey, I'll be proved right or wrong in a few weeks!

i have no idea about the different conenction methods of GPS so im just gonna nod my head *nods head* and agree with you.

i guess we will find out soon then :)

(thinks about costs)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.