or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Toshiba announces 64GB NAND flash chip, likely iPhone bound
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Toshiba announces 64GB NAND flash chip, likely iPhone bound

post #1 of 74
Thread Starter 
Toshiba has announced its new 64GB embedded NAND flash memory module will offer the highest available capacity in the industry in the first quarter of 2010.

The iPhone 3GS, released in June, included up to 32 GB of Toshiba NAND flash memory. The memory maker announced Tuesday that it created a new 64GB chip that combines 16 32Gbit (equal to 4GB) NAND chips using 32nm process technology. The chips also integrate a dedicated controller.

The new chips are available for sample now, and mass production of them is expected to begin in the first quarter of 2010. Toshiba said the product will be used in smartphones, mobile phones, netbooks and digital video cameras.

Likely to be a customer is Apple, which has doubled the maximum capacity of the iPhone with a new release every summer. Given the current 32GB iPhone 3GS, next year's iPhone is likely to offer 64GB of capacity.

In addition, the new 64GB iPod touch, introduced in September, uses a pair of 32GB NAND chips to achieve its maximum capacity. Toshiba's new chips would allow Apple to release a 128GB iPod touch sometime in 2010.



Toshiba said its new 64GB chip offers up to 1,070 hours of music at 128Kbps,8.3 hours of full-spec high definition video, and 19.2 hours of standard definition video. The individual 32Gbit chips are said to be 30 micrometers thick, giving them the highest density of NAND flash in the industry.
post #2 of 74
I guess a few people need more then 32GB in their iPhone..
I'm not one of those people. But if the competition has it, then the iPhone needs it to.
It's probably gonna be crazy expensive.
post #3 of 74
More memory is great if the next-gen iPhone is positioned as a video (say 720p) playback device.
post #4 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlcmh View Post

More memory is great if the next-gen iPhone is positioned as a video (say 720p) playback device.

Thinking maybe touch. I tried to use my phone as a playback device, bought the cables and all. It worked great until I got a call.
post #5 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwee View Post

I guess a few people need more then 32GB in their iPhone..
I'm not one of those people. But if the competition has it, then the iPhone needs it to.
It's probably gonna be crazy expensive.

Why would it be crazy expensive? Didn't the 32GB iPhone 3GS debut at the same price point as the previous 16GB iPhone 3G?

Same goes for the 64GB iPod touch 3G vs the 32GB iPod touch 2G.
post #6 of 74
128GB iPod Touch, please. My music collection now exceeds my 80GB iPod 5.5G (originally a 60GB) and I really prefer the Touch interface.

If they up the storage of the Touch that close to the iPod Classic, Apple just might kill the iPod Classic line.
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
post #7 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwee View Post

I guess a few people need more then 32GB in their iPhone..
I'm not one of those people. But if the competition has it, then the iPhone needs it to.
It's probably gonna be crazy expensive.

Bringing the (flash) storage capacities up to par with old iPod capacities is critical for truly allowing a person to stick with ONE device.

In 2007, many people had iPods that ranged from 30 - 80 gigs. Then the iPhone drops with 4 and 8. True this was on par with the Nano, the "most popular mp3 player" at the time, but still left most music and video hounds with a frustrating scenario.
post #8 of 74
I'd expect these to show up in the Apple Tablet first.
post #9 of 74
Oh this just dawned on me:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Toshiba has announced its new 64GB embedded NAND flash memory module will offer the highest available capacity in the industry in the first quarter of 2010.

Tablet says "hi."

Edit: D'oh, beaten.

Also, migrating people from iPod Classics to Touches means more potential customer for the App Store.
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
post #10 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwee View Post

I guess a few people need more then 32GB in their iPhone..
I'm not one of those people. But if the competition has it, then the iPhone needs it to.
It's probably gonna be crazy expensive.

It should be the same price as the current 32 GB offering. And more importantly, we can expect the current 32 GB iPhone and 64 GB touch can drop in price to today's 16/32 GB prices. I could maybe squeeze my content onto a 64 GB touch, but not at $399. Drop that to $299 and it becomes a better option.

And I don't think it would be that hard to start feeling cramped in 32 GB of storage considering some of the apps you can get... download a navigation app and all if it's maps and a couple of the other professional reference apps (such as medical and pharmacy references that are available for people in those professions), then loading even a normal-sized library of iTunes content and you could start running short of space.

Granted, it's not for everyone, but I wouldn't even consider a touch that had less than 64 GB of storage.

And don't forget, that Apple tablet is probably going to need higher capacities.
post #11 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by sCreeD View Post

Oh this just dawned on me:

Tablet says "hi."

Edit: D'oh, beaten.

Also, migrating people from iPod Classics to Touches means more potential customer for the App Store.


the 32GB modules shipped in 1Q 2009 as well. i bet the 128GB modules will ship in 1Q 2011.

everyone has a schedule including upgrading the machines that make these modules and the new stuff always ships in 1Q after everyone buys up the old crap during the holidays. been like this for thousands of years
post #12 of 74
I'm pretty sure the Touch uses two modules*, hence the current availability of the 64GB version for $400.

Two modules of 64GB in Q1 '10 -> 128GB Touch.

*Correction: "up to two modules"
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
post #13 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by sCreeD View Post

Oh this just dawned on me:

Tablet says "hi."

Edit: D'oh, beaten.

Also, migrating people from iPod Classics to Touches means more potential customer for the App Store.

Let's pray to God that the iPod Classic is never replaced by high-capacity Touches. The Touch sucks as a music playback device. I'd go for high-capacity Nanos instead though.
post #14 of 74
Quote:
Why would it be crazy expensive? Didn't the 32GB iPhone 3GS debut at the same price point as the previous 16GB iPhone 3G?

Same goes for the 64GB iPod touch 3G vs the 32GB iPod touch 2G.

Your missing the point. I guess I was unclear.
I think the current iPhone 32GB is crazy expensive

That being said, I will still buy they new one when it arrives.

Quote:
Granted, it's not for everyone, but I wouldn't even consider a touch that had less than 64 GB of storage.

Most people I know have the iPhone, buys a Touch for their kids to play games on, so they can have their iPhones for themselves.
The Touch is so much more than music.

My 00.2
post #15 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

The Touch sucks as a music playback device.

Please elaborate, I always feel hampered by the scrollwheel trying to find a specific song, for example.

Quote:
I'd go for high-capacity Nanos instead though.

True, if you prefer that interface. I don't see the Nano going anywhere and it might get more popular if the Classic is shelved.
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
post #16 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

Granted, it's not for everyone, but I wouldn't even consider a touch that had less than 64 GB of storage.

I agree. I'm too busy to manage my music playlists ... my collection is 70 GB and I woudl prefer to just dump all the music on there and just worry about managing videos and podcasts.

And 720p video is a necessity. The need to have to download 2 versions of Lost (SD and HD) so that i can play it on my iphone and my HDTV is ridiculous. The Zune can playback 720p content wihtout a hitch, so the iphone / ipod touch should also.

Sorry I had to mention Zune ... no I would never consider one, but it has features (namely 720p playback, OLED screens and embedded FM Radio) that the ipod touch and iphone definitely need to catch up with. An included USB-HDMI cable would be nice as well.
post #17 of 74
So next year we'll have a 128GB iPod touch and in 2011 we would probably have a 256GB iPod touch. Wow! No more reason for the iPod Classic.
Apple just needs to figure out how to bring iPhone OS to the iPod nano. I see the nano gaining a touch screen and abandoning the click wheel.

iPod nano 5th Gen 8GB Orange, iPad 3rd Gen WiFi 32GB White
MacBook Pro 15" Core i7 2.66GHz 8GB RAM 120GB Intel 320M
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 8GB RAM, iPhone 5 32GB Black

Reply

iPod nano 5th Gen 8GB Orange, iPad 3rd Gen WiFi 32GB White
MacBook Pro 15" Core i7 2.66GHz 8GB RAM 120GB Intel 320M
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 8GB RAM, iPhone 5 32GB Black

Reply
post #18 of 74
Looks like the 2010 iPhone will then offer 64GB AND the new dual core ARM processors. Sounds like a monster of a device. Just bought a 3GS this past summer so I guess I'll be waiting until 2011 to upgrade. By that time the hi-end iPhone will probably be sporting 128GB, so I'll be able to grab a 64GB for the price I paid for my current 16GB 3GS.
post #19 of 74
Quote:
svnipp \tLooks like the 2010 iPhone will then offer 64GB AND the new dual core ARM processors. Sounds like a monster of a device. Just bought a 3GS this past summer so I guess I'll be waiting until 2011 to upgrade. By that time the hi-end iPhone will probably be sporting 128GB, so I'll be able to grab a 64GB for the price I paid for my current 16GB 3GS.

They will have to call it the iPhone 3GWS. WS for Warp-Speed.
Let's just hope they keep the OS slim and fast, like it is now.
post #20 of 74
Alright. 64 gig Verizon iPhone! Bring it on.
post #21 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by sCreeD View Post

Please elaborate, I always feel hampered by the scrollwheel trying to find a specific song, for example.

I have 19,000 songs on my Classic, and I don't have a problem with the scroll wheel.

But mainly what bothers me about the Touch is that there's no way to change tracks without looking at the device, unless you use the crappy Apple headphones with remote. Hell, you can't even pause the song without looking at the device. And if you pause the song, you can't continue playing again without quitting whatever other app you might be in. Also, you can't play music videos continuously when you output to TV, so you can't use the Touch as a music video jukebox (it works just fine with the Classic).

Generally what I do on a commute is listen to music on the Classic while I use apps on the Touch. Works great.
post #22 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I have 19,000 songs on my Classic, and I don't have a problem with the scroll wheel.

But mainly what bothers me about the Touch is that there's no way to change tracks without looking at the device, unless you use the crappy Apple headphones with remote.

Okay, yeah, that's a valid use issue I hadn't thought about.
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
MWSF '07: Steve Jobs hates my wallet and my mobile carrier.
Reply
post #23 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbonner View Post

Thinking maybe touch. I tried to use my phone as a playback device, bought the cables and all. It worked great until I got a call.

Why not put it on Airplane Mode when using it as a playback device?
post #24 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac View Post

Alright. 64 gig Verizon iPhone! Bring it on.

I would advocate that CDMA needs to die. The rest of the world uses GSM. The ability to buy and pop in a local sim in a different country is priceless. If Apple builds a phone for Verizon, it better be dual CDMA/GSM.
post #25 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by jenkman91 View Post

DOWN WITH AT&T!!!!

Iphone USERS, HELP BRING AT&T'S NETWORK TO ITS KNEES THIS FRIDAY AT 12:00pm PST... IF YOU HAVE AN iPhone RUN THE MOST DATA INTENSIVE APP YOU HAVE OVER THE 3G NETWORK FOR AS LONG AS YOU CAN... REMEMBER, ITS THIS FRIDAY AT 12:00pm PST, 3:00pm EASTERN

HELP SPREAD THE WORD!


( I am not a troll, I am just trying to spread the word)

No! Why would you do this? What will this accomplish?

Read this: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/13/bu...sq=AT&T&st=cse
post #26 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I have 19,000 songs on my Classic, and I don't have a problem with the scroll wheel.

But mainly what bothers me about the Touch is that there's no way to change tracks without looking at the device, unless you use the crappy Apple headphones with remote. Hell, you can't even pause the song without looking at the device. And if you pause the song, you can't continue playing again without quitting whatever other app you might be in. Also, you can't play music videos continuously when you output to TV, so you can't use the Touch as a music video jukebox (it works just fine with the Classic).

Generally what I do on a commute is listen to music on the Classic while I use apps on the Touch. Works great.

You can hit the home button twice to bring up the iPod controls. Works when the phone is locked and in most apps. In time you wont need to look at the screen to hit the next track button.

The lack of physical iPod controls was one of the biggest worries I had, thus far it hasn't been a big deal. I'd still like to have physical iPod controls somewhere though.

Edit: You can get non-apple headphones with a remote, and you can even get an adapter with a remote that will let you use any headphones you want now, so the point is largely moot now anyway.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #27 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by eehd View Post

No! Why would you do this? What will this accomplish?

Read this: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/13/bu...sq=AT&T&st=cse

It's not problem with the iPhone. It's AT&T's network.
post #28 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

It's not problem with the iPhone. It's AT&T's network.

No Network, despite their claims, would have been able to handle the bandwidth demand from iPhone users; the number of users is just staggering.

Apple has changed the way people use their phones and AT&T was clearly not prepared for the iPhone's success, but no network really is. I guarantee you that if the iPhone some how switches to Verizon, it will cripple their network because a) existing iPhone users will switch because they are unhappy with AT&T; b) those that won't get the iPhone because they have heard bad things from AT&T and are Sprint or T-Mobile costumers will switch and c) existing Verizon customers will switch because the iPhone is now on their networks. Do the math; Verizon cant handle all this demand.

I'm an iPhone user who lives in NYC, my service isnt great as it is, I don't need anyone else to make it worse. I've travel to other cities in the US, and the service has been exceptional. AT&T needs to improve its network in markets where demand is the highest (NYC and San Francisco), but crippling the network will screw those iPhone users who get really good service.
post #29 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

You can hit the home button twice to bring up the iPod controls.

Yes I know that. But read my post. If you pause the track, and go back into your app, you no longer have this option to resume playback. That's dumb, and it's simply something that works better with the Classic/Nano.
Quote:
Edit: You can get non-apple headphones with a remote, and you can even get an adapter with a remote that will let you use any headphones you want now, so the point is largely moot now anyway.

Can I get any headphones with remote that have a short cord (that's a deal killer for me if only a long cord is available)? And I have headphones i love already. Why should I buy yet another pair?

And I cannot buy the only adapter available (Scosche) here, and I can't currently buy anything on the internet.

I don't have a problem carrying two devices. If I lost my Classic or it broke, and my only other option were to use my Touch for playback, I'd be severely disappointed, regardless of the capacity.

But as I said before, a high capacity (128GB or more) Nano would be awesome.
post #30 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbonner View Post

Thinking maybe touch. I tried to use my phone as a playback device, bought the cables and all. It worked great until I got a call.

Just put your phone in "airplane mode."
post #31 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

Why would it be crazy expensive? Didn't the 32GB iPhone 3GS debut at the same price point as the previous 16GB iPhone 3G?

Same goes for the 64GB iPod touch 3G vs the 32GB iPod touch 2G.


That due to having to stack twice as many chips on the module. That is if the chips use the same tech as last years modules.

Dave
post #32 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

It's not problem with the iPhone. It's AT&T's network.

Correct. The problem is AT&T, not Apple. iPhone users outside of the United States have a markedly better user experience.
post #33 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Just put your phone in "airplane mode."

Um... some people actually like to have the option of receiving calls while they watch videos, without the call interrupting playback.
post #34 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Correct. The problem is AT&T, not Apple. iPhone users outside of the United States have a markedly better user experience.

But what will crippling the network accomplish?
post #35 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Um... some people actually like to have the option of receiving calls while they watch videos, without the call interrupting playback.

That doesnt make any sense. Unless you are watching a silent film then any phone call is going to interrupt playback. Having both the audio from the video and the audio from the phone call being pumped at the same time or having the audio of the video cut out so you can watch the video without sound while on a call arent normal activities the average consumer would want.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #36 of 74
Current Lineup
$199 8GB slow
$299 32GB fast
$399 64GB fast

Next Lineup
$199 16GB fast
$299 32GB fast + camera
$399 64GB fast + camera
post #37 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by eehd View Post

But what will crippling the network accomplish?

I did not suggest to cripple the network. Please do not put words into my mouth. Thank you.
post #38 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Um... some people actually like to have the option of receiving calls while they watch videos, without the call interrupting playback.

Get an iPod touch and a dumbphone. It works great for me! :-P
post #39 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by OnePotato View Post

I'd expect these to show up in the Apple Tablet first.

Most likely four at a time. 256GB would be a minimal requirement for some in a tablet. The other thing is lower cost secondary storage devices. That means SSD devices, USB dongles and the like.

In any event if Apple makes a tablet with four sites on the PC board for flash then that tablet could come with multiple storage capacity sizes. Well they better offer up models with lots of storage, as I don't buy into the idea of cloud storage. The cloud might have some reason to exist in the future but it won't be accessable everywhere. Since a tablet can go any where it can't rely on the cloud or a network connection.

Frankly based on my experience with iPhone or cell phones in general you absolutely need local storage. Lots of storage actually as I'm often having to trim what is stored on my iPhone.

Dave
post #40 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Get an iPod touch and a dumbphone. It works great for me! :-P

Yes, that's what I have.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Toshiba announces 64GB NAND flash chip, likely iPhone bound